State ofNew Mexico

Susana Martinez

Governor

June 24, 2011

Dr. Alfredo Armendariz

Regional Administrator (6-A)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6

1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200

Dallas, TX 75202-2733

Dear Dr. Armendariz:

tTl

X

.....

tTl

::0

:z: iii! > ::0

IT1

> w (") ..,

.., U1 IT1

> - :ii

Vl :II:

..." <

IT1 c 0 <:

§ N

0 C)

:z:

'*'0 . I " cL 6RA.~~~:.•...6~N . 6DRA~:.t~I.'6WQ. ..•...•.........

6MD 6SF .

60EJ..•••.••••...6RC•..•..•••.••••••..

6PDQ!:!~i.ffi<1..6XA.~~.:.I.. ~.Io

c.o",+<0 /1.,;( e.-.c./-

On behalf of the New Mexico Environment Department, I am pleased to submit to the

Environmental Protection Agency the enclosed revisions to the New Mexico State

Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions include amendments to New Mexico's Regional

Haze SIP under 40 CFR § 51.309.

The hearing record for all of the SIP revisions is attached, which includes the revised SIP, filed

regulations, transcripts, exhibits, public notices, affidavits of publication, the notice of intent to

present technical testimony, and public comments.

Included with the attached hardcopy of the hearing record is an electronic copy of the record

provided on disk which I certify to be an exact duplicate ofthe hardcopy.

These SIP revisions satisfY the requirements of the Clean Air Act, comply with EPA regulations

and policy, and will result in significant emission reductions while preserving the proper federalstate partnership envisioned under the Clean Air Act. As such, EPA must approve these

revisions. In addition, because the enclosed SIP revisions address two different provisions ofthe

federal Clean Air Act, I believe EPA should address them separately.

First, the enclosed "Interstate Transport SIP" addresses Section 11 0 of the Act, which requires

states to avoid interfering with any other states' implementation plans for visibility. As made

clear in the Interstate Transport SIP submitted in 2007, and further explained in two letters to

EPA Region 6 from the previous New Mexico administration (one from Governor Richardson on

June 12,2009 and another from a member of his staff on May 6, 2010), New Mexico has already

satisfied its Interstate Transport obligations. However, the enclosed Interstate Transport SIP

supplements those previous submittals by confirming that the emissions from New Mexico

sources will not exceed the assumptions utilized in the modeling conducted by the Western

Regional Air Partnership (WRAP), upon which other western states' visibility plans are based.

State Capitol • Room 400 • Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501 • 505-476-2200 • fax: 505-476-2226
EPA has already recognized that "the analysis conducted by the WRAP provides an appropriate

means for designing a [plan] that will ensure that emissions from sources in New Mexico are not

interfering with the visibility programs ofother states." In fact, the enclosed Interstate Transport

SIP confirms that emissions will actually be much lower than the WRAP modeling assumptions.

Second, the enclosed revisions to the 2003 "Regional Haze Section 309 SIP" and the enclosed

"Regional Haze Section 309(g) SIP" (together, the "Regional Haze SIPs") address New

Mexico's obligation to reduce visibility impairment at national parks and wilderness areas

("Class I areas") in accordance with Sections 169A & 169B ofthe Clean Air Act. The Regional

Haze SIPs satisfy New Mexico's regional haze requirements by adopting new sulfur dioxide

(S02) milestones for the Section 309 Backstop Trading Program, establishing reasonable

progress goals and a long-term strategy for New Mexico's nine Class I areas, and adopting a

variety of control measures to address emissions of visibility impairing pollutants from New

Mexico sources. Most notably, the enclosed Regional Haze SIP also includes a Best Available

Retrofit Technology (BART) determination for the San Juan Generating Station, which requires

the installation of a Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction (SNCR) system to meet EPA's

presumptive BART limit for nitrogen oxides (NO,).

I am aware that EPA has proposed a different plan for implementing the Interstate Transport

program and at least a portion of the Regional Haze program in New Mexico through a

combined Federal Implementation Plan (FIP). I am also aware ofEPA's concern that it is bound

by a court order to complete that rulemaking effort by August 5, 20 II. However, the court order

imposing the August 5, 20 II deadline only requires EPA to address Interstate Transport

requirements before that date. In addition, the proposed FIP suffers from a variety of legal and

technical flaws and inappropriately seeks to address only an isolated portion ofthe regional haze

program. Under these circumstances, I believe EPA can and should address the Interstate

Transport program and Regional Haze program separately. Doing so will enable EPA to address

New Mexico's Interstate Transport requirements by the court-ordered deadline, while allowing

additional time for review ofthe more lengthy and complicated Regional Haze SIPs.

One of the fundamental principles expressed in Section !OI of the Clean Air Act is that "air

pollution control at its source is the primary responsibility of States and local governments."

That principle is nowhere better illustrated in the Act than in its visibility provisions, which, as

EPA and the courts have recognized, grant to the states significant discretion in the

implementation of measures to address visibility impairment. In designing the regional haze

program, Congress recognized that the individual states are best-equipped to balance the need for

robust environmental protections with the costs those protections necessarily entail.

Moreover, nothing in the Clean Air Act requires EPA to address Interstate Transport and

Regional Haze requirements together. On the contrary, EPA has generally addressed these

programs separately in the past. As just one example, EPA Region 8 recently proposed to take

separate action on the Interstate Transport and Regional Haze implementation plan revisions

submitted by the state of Colorado. Even EPA's proposed FIP for New Mexico itself

contemplates separate Interstate Transport and Regional Haze plans with regard to S02

emiSSIOns.
Accordingly, EPA should meet its August 5, 2011 deadline by simply approving New Mexico's

prior Interstate Transport submittals, as supplemented by the enclosed Interstate Transport SIP.

Even if EPA does not agree that New Mexico's prior submittals have already satisfied its

Interstate Transport obligations, EPA should be able to act on New Mexico's four-page Interstate

Transport SIP before August 5, 2011.

Since the court order does not require EPA to address New Mexico's Regional Haze program by

August 5, 2011, New Mexico is now, as of this submittal, in the same position as nearly every

other state - awaiting EPA action on its Regional Haze SIP. As with other states, EPA must

determine whether New Mexico's Regional Haze SIPs are complete no more than six months

from this date and, following that completeness determination or the expiration of six months,

EPA must act to approve or disapprove those SIPs within twelve months, including time allowed

for public notice and comment on the proposed action. Because EPA will be required to

consider New Mexico's Regional Haze SIPs regardless of whether it flllalizes the proposed FIP,

EPA should take no action on its proposed FIP, particularly since the August 5, 2011 deadline

does not apply to regional haze. At a minimum, EPA should reopen the docket on the proposed

PIP for at least ninety (90) days to accept further comment in light ofthe submission ofthese SIP

revisions.

I hope you will begin an immediate, expedited review and approval ofthe enclosed SIP revisions

and, as recommended above, take separate action on the separate Interstate Transport and

Regional Haze requirements ofthe Clean Air Act.

If there are any questions concerning this SIP submittal, please contact Raj Solomon at (505)

827-2855.

Sincerely,

Susana Martinez

Governor

Enclosures

cc: Guy Donaldson, EPA Region 6

Dave Martin, NMED Cabinet Secretary

Raj Solomon, NMED Deputy Cabinet Secretary
1

List of Enclosures: 

01 Section 309 Revised State Implementation Plan 

02 Appendix K - Recommendations for Making Attribution Determinations in the 

Context of Reasonably Attributable BART 

03 20.2.73 NMAC Revisions - Notices of Intent and Emissions Inventory 

Requirements 

04 20.2.81 NMAC Revisions - Western Backstop Sulfur Dioxide Trading Program 

05 Section 309(g) State Implementation Plan 

06 Appendix A - Emissions Overview (WRAP, undated) 

07 Appendix B - Air Quality Modeling (WRAP, undated) 

08 Appendix C - Summary of WRAP RMC BART Modeling for New Mexico 

09 Appendix D - New Mexico BART Determination for San Juan Generating 

Station 

10 Appendix E - Supplementary Information for Four Factor Analyses by WRAP 

States, EC/R Incorporated, May 4, 2009 (corrected April 20, 2010) 

11 Appendix F - Supplementary Information for Four-Factor Analyses for 

Selected Individual Facilities in New Mexico, May 5, 2009 

12 NMED Notice of Intent to Present Technical Testimony - May 2, 2011 

13 NMED Ex. 1 Clean Air Act § 169A 

14 NMED Ex. 2 Clean Air Act § 169B 

15 NMED Ex. 3 40 C.F.R. § 51.308 (Regional Haze Rule § 308) 

16 NMED Ex. 4 40 C.F.R. § 51.309 (Regional Haze Rule § 309) 

17 NMED Ex. 5 BART Guidelines – Appendix Y to 40 C.F.R. Part 51 Published 

at 70 Fed. Reg. 39104 

18 NMED Ex. 6 NMED Requests for Information from PNM 

19 NMED Ex. 6a Email - BART Modeling Results from WRAP (11.9.06) 

20 NMED Ex. 6b Email – PNM San Juan Generating BART Modeling (6-26-07) 

21 NMED Ex. 6c Email - Comments on the BART modeling report for the San 

Juan Generating Station (7.30.07) 

22 NMED Ex. 6d Email - SJGS BART Analysis Additional Information Request 

(9.21.07) 

23 NMED Ex. 6e Letter - Department Request (12.21.07) 

24 NMED Ex. 6f Letter PNM-BART-Request (4-25-08) 

25 NMED Ex. 6g Email - PNM NOx Information Review (3.20.08) 

26 NMED Ex. 6h Email - Meeting (6.18.08) 

27 NMED Ex. 6i Letter – Additional Information Request (12.29.08) 
2

28 NMED Ex. 7 PNM Submittals Related to BART 

29 NMED Ex. 7a San Juan BART Modeling Protocol (4.13.07) 

30 NMED Ex. 7b PNM BART Analysis (6.6.07) 

31 NMED Ex. 7c Email Thread with Cost Analysis Attached 

32 NMED Ex. 7d SCR Cost Analysis - (7.11.07) 

33 NMED Ex. 7e SNCR Hybrid Cost Analysis (7.11.07) 

34 NMED Ex. 7f Updated Visibility Cost Effectiveness Data - (8.23.07) 

35 NMED Ex. 7g PNM Response to NMED (9.14.07) - September 14, 2007 

36 NMED Ex. 7h PNM SCR Schematic 

37 NMED Ex. 7i Refined Visibility Results (11.5.07) 

38 NMED Ex. 7j PNM Discussion of OAQPS Cost Manual Method (3.29.08) 

39 NMED Ex. 7k Final BART Modeling Response (3.31.08) 

40 NMED Ex. 7L Final BART SNCR Analysis (5.30.08) 

41 NMED Ex. 7m Discussion of SJGS Coal and Classification 

42 NMED Ex. 7n Final Nalco-MOBOTEC NOx BART Analysis (8.28.08) 

43 NMED Ex. 7o Final PM BART Analysis (8.28.08) 

44 NMED Ex. 7p PNM SO3 Removal Report (3.16.09) 

45 NMED Ex. 7q SNCR Cover Ltr (2.9.11) 

46 NMED Ex. 7r PNM BART SNCR Analysis Update (2.9.11) 

47 NMED Ex. 7s SNCR Cover Ltr (2.11.11) 

48 NMED Ex. 7t Revised SNCR Analysis (2.11.11) 

49 NMED Ex. 7u Rate Impact Analysis (2.11.11) 

50 NMED Ex. 8 Testimony of Mary Uhl 

51 NMED Ex. 8a Testimony on Scientific and Regulatory Background of 

Regional Haze 

52 NMED Ex. 8b Regional Haze Powerpoint Slides 

53 NMED Ex. 8c Testimony Re BART Determination for PNM SJGS 

54 NMED Ex. 9 Testimony of Rita Bates 

55 NMED Ex. 9a Testimony Re Revisions to 2003 § 309 SIP 

56 NMED Ex. 9b Testimony Re Proposed §309(g) SIP 

57 NMED Ex. 10 Additional Proposed Revisions to § 309 SIP (5.2.11) 

58 NMED Ex. 11 Additional Proposed Revisions to § 309(g) SIP (5.2.11) 

59 NMED Ex. 12 Public Notices 
3

60 San Juan Citizens Alliance Comment Letter - May 3, 2011 

61 NMED Response to San Juan Citizens Alliance Comments 

62 Public Service Company of New Mexico Notice of Intent to Present Technical 

Testimony - May 17, 2011 

63 San Juan Coal Company Notice of Intent to Present Technical Testimony - 

May 17, 2011 

64 The Natural Resources Defense Council, San Juan Citizens Alliance, and 

WildEarth Guardians Entry of Appearance - May 17, 2011 

65 NMED Notice of Receipt of Comments - May 16, 2011 (includes U.S. EPA 

Comments) 

66 NMED Supplemental Notice of Intent to Present Technical Testimony - May 

20, 2011 

67 NMED Ex. 13 May 20, 2011 Revisions to § 309(g) SIP in Response to EPA 

Comments 

68 NMED Ex. 14 May 20, 2011 Revisions to 20.2.81 NMAC in Response to EPA 

Comments 

69 NMED Ex. 15 May 13, 2011 Comments from U.S. EPA Region 6 

70 NMED Ex. 16 NMED Responses to EPA Comments of May 13, 2011 

71 NMED Ex. 17 U.S.F.S. Letter of March 30, 2011with Comments 

72 NMED Ex. 18 NMED Response to U.S.F.S Comments of March 30, 2011 

73 NMED Ex. 19 Proposed Statement of Reasons for Adoption and Order 

74 NMED Second Notice of Receipt of Comments - May 26, 2011 (includes 

comments received May 25, 2011 from U.S. Park Service and Fish and Wildlife 

Service) 

75 NMED Exhibits Presented at the June 1, 2011 Hearing 

76 NMED Ex. 20 Compiled Section 309(g) SIP (included herein as Section 309(g) 

SIP) -- was not included in submittal EPA received -- probably the same as 

enclosures 05 to 11. 

77 NMED Ex. 21 Responses to U.S. Park Service and Fish and Wildlife Service 

Comments 

78 Transcript of Hearing - June 1 and 2, 2011 (Volumes 1 and 2) 

79 New Mexico Environmental Improvement Board Statement of Reasons for 

Adoption of SIP Revisions 
Exhibits 7 to 7k are in a separate document. 

Final BART Response 053008.doc 1 of 11 

PNM San Juan Generating Station 

BART Analysis of SNCR 

May 30, 2008 

Introduction 

In a letter dated April 25, 2008, the New Mexico Environmental Department – 

Air Quality Bureau (NMED) commented that the NOx presumptive control level of 0.23 

lb/MBtu for the San Juan Generating Station (SJGS) can be modified to alternative NOx

emission levels in order to evaluate control technologies that that are less effective and 

that do not meet the required presumptive emission level. Based on this reasoning, 

NMED requested additional analyses be performed. Specifically, the NMED requested 

additional consideration and modeling of the Nalco-Mobotec ROFA and Rotamix, and 

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction (SNCR) NOx control technologies. 

As described in the June 6, 2007 BART application document and in PNM’s 

March 31, 2008 response to NMED questions, the ROFA technology is a type of overfire 

air (OFA) system. As discussed in the March 31, 2008 filing, ROFA does not result in a 

lower NOx emission rate than the LNB/OFA systems currently being installed at SJGS. 

Since PNM has already evaluated the impact of LNB/OFA system as part of its previous 

BART submittals, no additional analyses were done for the ROFA technology. 

The Rotamix technology is a simply Nalco/Mobotec’s version of SNCR control 

technology. Therefore, it does not need to be evaluated separately from other vendors of 

SNCR technology. 

For SNCR technology the first three steps of the five step BART process were 

completed as part of the original BART submittal on June 6. 2007. However, because 

SNCR did not meet the presumptive limit of 0.23 lb/MBtu for subbituminous fuel, the 

last two steps were not completed. To review, the BART analysis is defined in the 

regional haze regulations and guidelines in 40 CFR Part 51. The following factors are 

considered when identifying the best method of emissions reduction: 

• Technical feasibility. 

• Cost of compliance. 

• Energy and non-air quality environmental impacts of compliance. 

• Existing pollution control equipment in use or installed at the source. 

• Remaining useful life of the source. 

• Degree of anticipated improvement in visibility. 

 
Final BART Response 053008.doc 2 of 11 

The BART analysis consists of the following five steps to arrive at a selection of 

the best methods of emissions reduction for a BART-eligible source: 

• Identify all available retrofit control technologies. 

• Eliminate technically infeasible options. 

• Evaluate control effectiveness of remaining control technologies. 

• Evaluate impacts and document the results. 

• Evaluate visibility impacts. 

The two parts of this document complete the last two steps of the BART analysis 

for SNCR. 

Part 1 - Engineering Impact Analysis 

 An engineering impact analysis was performed for the SNCR NOx control 

technology. The results of that impact analysis are shown in Attachment 1. Table 7-1 in 

Attachment 1 is an update to the Table 7-1 found in PNM’s original BART submittal of 

June 6, 2007. It has been updated to include the engineering impact of SNCR. In 

addition to Table 7-1, Attachment 1 also includes the Design Concept Definitions for 

SNCR and the detailed cost tables for installing SNCR on each unit at the SJGS. 

Part 2 – Visibility Analysis 

Subsequent to the June 6, 2007 submittal, PNM further investigated additional 

refinements to the BART CALPUFF air dispersion modeling analyses which included 

nitrate repartitioning and more realistic ammonia background concentrations based on 

monitored values at several western Class I areas. These additional modeling options are 

considered more realistic and therefore will again form the basis of this analysis. 

To date, PNM has previously submitted three BART modeling analyses. To 

clarify the contents of these analyses, as well as for this submittal, a summary of each has 

been provided: 

June 6, 2007

Modeling analysis were performed to provide SJGS plant-wide regional haze 

(visibility) impacts at 16 Class I areas. The analyses were based on a constant 1 

ppb background ammonia concentration and no nitrate repartitioning. The NOx 

control technologies analyzed were the Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) and 

SNCR/SCR Hybrid. 
Final BART Response 053008.doc 3 of 11 

November 6, 2007

Modeling analysis were performed to provide SJGS plant-wide regional haze 

(visibility) impacts at 16 Class I areas. The analysis was based on refinements 

which included using the nitrate repartitioning methodology and monthly variable 

background ammonia concentrations. Again, the NOx control technologies 

analyzed were the SCR and SNCR/SCR Hybrid. 

March 31, 2008

Two main modeling analyses were performed to provide SJGS plant-wide and 

unit specific regional haze (visibility) impacts at 16 Class I areas for the SCR NOx

control technology only. One of the analyses, believed to be the more 

representative of ammonia chemistry of the area, was based on the November 6, 

2007 refinements which included using the nitrate repartitioning methodology and 

monthly variable background ammonia concentrations. The other analyses 

included nitrate repartitioning and a constant background ammonia concentration 

as requested by the NMED. 

May 30, 2008

Two modeling analyses were performed to provide SJGS plant-wide and unit 

specific regional haze (visibility) impacts at 16 Class I areas for the SNCR NOx 

control technology only. Similar to the March 31, 2008 analyses, one of the 

analyses was based on the November 6, 2007 refinements which included using 

the nitrate repartitioning methodology and monthly variable background ammonia 

concentrations. The other analyses included nitrate repartitioning and a constant 

background ammonia concentration. It should be noted that all vendors of SNCR 

(including Fuel Tech and Nalco/Mobotec) have been modeled together as one 

technology called SNCR. This is the same approach that is used for modeling 

SCR control technology, where all vendors are modeled generically as SCR. 

The modeling refinements contained in this submittal using nitrate repartitioning 

and the variable ammonia background, as well as the November 2007 and March 2008 

submittals, supersedes the original June 2007 BART modeling analyses as PNM believes 

these analyses are more representative. Therefore, the purpose of this section is to again, 

summarize the two refinements used and to provide supplemental information on the 

background ammonia data. Lastly, the document will summarize the SJGS plant-wide 
Final BART Response 053008.doc 4 of 11 

and unit specific modeling for the SNCR control technology scenario using nitrate 

repartitioning and a both a variable and constant ammonia background. 

Nitrate Repartitioning 

The first refinement for the SJGS BART visibility analyses (included in the 

November 2007 submittal) was to better account for the amount of particulate nitrate 

(NO3) by limiting the available ammonia when individual unit puffs overlap. The 

original visibility modeling conducted for the June 2, 2007 BART application did not 

incorporate repartitioning of available ammonia (MNITRATE = 0). The refinements did 

not allow each overlapping puff(s) to use the full ammonia background value but instead 

only a portion of the ammonia available (MNITRATE = 1). This concept is reflected in 

Section 3.1.2.6 of the WRAP protocol. It is important to note that this refinement noted 

as nitrate repartitioning is not the ammonia limiting method commonly referred to as 

ALM. 

Ammonia Background Concentration 

As described in Section 8.1 of the BART application, the air dispersion modeling 

analyses presented were conducted in accordance with the CALMET/CALPUFF Protocol 

for BART Exemption Screening Analysis for Class I Areas in the Western United States

dated August 15, 2006, (hereinafter referred to as the WRAP Protocol). Specifically, the 

initial SJGS BART modeling for the June 6, 2007 BART Application was performed 

using the same high fixed background ammonia level of 1 ppb that was used for the 

initial modeling performed by WRAP RMC. However, there is limited real-time or 

historic ambient concentration information for ammonia within the modeling domain and 

at the individual Class I areas from sources such as CASNET. As a result, there is 

limited information to use to verify whether the assumed 1 ppb ammonia background 

concentration is representative. In fact, colder temperatures and limited agriculture 

activity, among other variables, could limit the amount of ammonia present in the 

ambient atmosphere, thus limiting the ammonia available to chemically react to form 

sulfates and nitrates to reduce visibility. Section 3.1.2.6 of WRAP protocol indicates that 

the 1 ppb value would be initially used and the issue revisited at a later time: 

Thus, based on the fact that western Class I areas tend to be either more arid or 

forest land than grassland we proposed to initially use a 1 ppb background 

ammonia value for the CALPUFF runs. We will then revisit the background 

ammonia values for the Class I areas for the post processing step and provide the 

CALPUFF output to the States so they can investigate alternative background 

ammonia values if desired.
Final BART Response 053008.doc 5 of 11 

No additional information from the WRAP regarding refined ammonia 

background concentrations was available. Therefore, an investigation was undertaken to 

locate more realistic ammonia background values. The Sithe Global Power, LLC’s 

Desert Rock Energy Facility and the Toquop Energy Project visibility analyses located in 

the southwestern U.S. used variable monthly background ammonia concentrations. 

Based on this information, refinements to SJGS’s BART modeling (included in the 

November 2007 and March 2008 submittals) reflected these previously used and 

approved values. These background ammonia concentrations are presented in Table 1 for 

reference. These data were based on ammonia background concentrations monitored at 

several western class I areas. 

Table 1 

Variable Monthly Ammonia 

Background Concentration1

Month 

Background Ammonia 

Concentration 

(ppb) 

January 0.2 

February 0.2 

March 0.2 

April 0.5 

May 0.5 

June 1.0 

July 1.0 

August 1.0 

September 1.0 

October 0.5 

November 0.5 

December 0.5 

1

The ammonia data and supporting information 

for the values contained in Desert Rock Energy 

Facility and the Toquop Energy Project 

visibility analyses were included in detail in 

Attachment 1 of the March 31, 2008 report 

submittal. 

Additionally, Table 2 contains a monthly summary of actual monthly monitored 

ammonia data from a long term ammonia air monitoring study in western Wyoming. 

This monitoring study, located in the Upper Green River Basin of western Wyoming 

southwest of Bridge Wilderness Area, was initiated in December 2006 by Shell 
Final BART Response 053008.doc 6 of 11 

Exploration & Production Company and continued for 15 months. The findings of this 

study were presented at the Air & Waste Management Association (AWMA) Aerosol & 

Atmospheric Optics: Visual Air Quality and Radiation in Moab Utah on May 1, 2008. 

The extended abstract for this presentation has been included as Attachment 2. As Table 

2 illustrates, these monthly mean ammonia values (referenced from Figure 2 of the 

abstract) have the same monthly trends as the ammonia data used in PNM’s previous 

modeling submittals (November 2007 and March 2008 submittals). This data is 

representative of another western area similar to that of northwestern New Mexico are 

much less than those values currently assumed in the PNM modeling. In fact, the annual 

average ammonia value is 0.24 ppb. This data has been included for illustration purposes 

only and again reiterates the premise that the 1 ppb constant ammonia value is 

conservatively high and not representative of actual ammonia in the area of the SJGS. 

Table 2 

Monitored Variable Monthly Ammonia 

Background Concentration1

Month 

Background Ammonia 

Concentration 

(ppb) 

January < 0.1 

February < 0.1 

March 0.2 

April 0.2 

May 0.3 

June 0.3 

July 0.8 

August 0.8 

September 0.3 

October 0.2 

November 0.1 

December < 0.1 

1

The Wyoming ammonia data is from the 

extended abstract presented at the Air & Waste 

Management Association (AWMA) Aerosol & 

Atmospheric Optics: Visual Air Quality and 

Radiation in Moab Utah on May 1, 2008. 

Visibility Summary 

Based on the aforementioned refinements in background ammonia concentrations 

and nitrate repartitioning, revised CALPUFF visibility modeling was performed for three 
Final BART Response 053008.doc 7 of 11 

cases; pre-consent decree, consent decree (which represents SJGS’s BART baseline 

scenario), and the SNCR control technology scenario. The modeling summarized in this 

report is for the SJGS on a plant-wide basis and for each of the four SJGS units on an 

individual unit basis. It is important to note that all other modeling options as described 

in the BART application were unchanged. For simplicity, the following results discuss 

the differences between the consent decree scenario and the SNCR scenario. The 

visibility modeling results are contained in Attachment 3. 

SJGS Visibility Summary with Nitrate Repartitioning and Variable Ammonia

The results of the refined visibility modeling for the SJGS plant, assuming the 

same SNCR control technology is installed on all four units, are illustrated in Tables 1 

through 4 of Attachment 3. These tables summarize the scenarios and the maximum 

visibility (deciview) impact seen at any of the 16 Class I areas at any time over the 2001 

to 2003 period. The results of this analysis, using the aforementioned refinements, 

indicates a minimal improvement in visibility impact at each of the 16 Class I areas. 

 The maximum visibility (deciview) improvement seen at any of the 16 Class I 

areas at any time over the 2001 to 2003 period is illustrated in Table 4 for each scenario. 

The expected degree of visibility improvement for each control scenario for each unit (on 

a plant-wide basis) was determined by the difference in the maximum visibility 

improvement for each receptor at each of the sixteen Class I areas. Again, it is important 

to note that the control technology associated with the consent decree formulated the 

SJGS’s baseline case, as well as the baseline case for the individual unit analyses 

described later. Additionally, the cost-effectiveness for the potential BART control 

technologies from the BART application were used to calculate visibility improvement 

cost-effectiveness in $/deciview ($/dv). Three major scenarios are shown in the 

visibility improvement cost effectiveness summary in Table 4: 

• Pre-consent decree to consent decree. 

• Consent decree to additional SNCR NOx control technology alternatives scenario. 

• Pre-consent decree to additional SNCR NOx control technology alternatives 

scenario. 

These maximum visibility improvements between the consent decree and the 

SNCR control scenario range from 0.04 dv to 0.21 dv of expected visibility improvement 

above the consent decree scenario. The results indicate that adding additional SNCR 

NOx control technology beyond the consent decree does not yield visibility improvement 

greater than 0.5 dv at any Class I area. In fact, as previously noted, the maximum 

visibility improvement at any of the 16 class I areas is only 0.21 dv which is considered 

insignificant. 
Final BART Response 053008.doc 8 of 11 

Based on the visibility improvement modeled and the total annual cost evaluated 

in the impact analysis stage of the BART application document, the cost-effectiveness for 

visibility improvement (annual cost per improvement in visibility, $/dv), was determined 

for SJGS over the aforementioned range of visibility improvement. The resulting cost for 

installation of SNCRs for all four units ranges from $354 million/dv to $75 million/dv. 

Attachment 3 contains a SJGS plant-wide summary of the 98th percentile visibility 

impact for the three modeled technology scenarios (i.e., Pre-Consent Decree, Consent 

Decree, SNCR scenarios), provides information on the number of days above 0.5 dv 

threshold, and indicates the contribution of each pollutant associated with the 98th

percentile visibility impact for each class I area. 

Unit Specific Visibility Summary with Nitrate Repartitioning and Variable 

Ammonia

The results of the refined visibility modeling for Unit 1, Unit 2, Unit 3, and Unit 4 

are illustrated in Tables 5-8, 9-12, 13-16, and 17-20 of Attachment 3, respectively. These 

tables summarize the scenarios and the maximum visibility (deciview) impact seen at any 

of the 16 Class I areas at any time over the 2001 to 2003 period. Similar to results seen 

for the SJGS facility, the visibility impacts at Mesa Verde represent the maximum 

visibility impact at any of the 16 Class I areas. In addition, this analysis indicates a 

minimal improvement in visibility impact at each of the 16 Class I areas. 

The maximum visibility (deciview) improvement seen at any of the 16 Class I 

areas at any time over the 2001 to 2003 period is illustrated in Tables 8, 12, 16, and 20. 

Again, the expected degree of visibility improvement for each control scenario for each 

unit was determined by the difference in the maximum visibility improvement for each 

receptor at each of the sixteen Class I areas. Furthermore, the same methodology 

previously described for the SJGS’s cost-effectiveness in ($/dv) was used here for each 

unit. 

These maximum visibility improvements between the consent decree and the 

SNCR control scenario for each unit are similar to that of the combined SJGS. The 

visibility improvements are summarized below. 

• Unit 1 improvements range from 0.02 dv to 0.16 dv. 

• Unit 2 improvements range from 0.02 dv to 0.16 dv 

• Unit 3 improvements range from 0.02 dv to 0.15 dv 

• Unit 4 improvements range from 0.0 dv to 0.15 dv 
Final BART Response 053008.doc 9 of 11 

The results again indicate that adding additional SNCR NOx control technology 

beyond the consent decree does not yield visibility improvement greater than 0.5 dv at 

any Class I area. Based on the visibility improvement modeled and the total annual cost 

evaluated in the impact analysis stage of the BART application document, the costeffectiveness for visibility improvement (annual cost per improvement in visibility, $/dv), 

was determined for each unit for each Class I area. The resulting cost for installation of 

SNCRs for each unit is summarized below. 

• Unit 1 cost range is $225 million/dv to $21 million/dv. 

• Unit 2 cost range is $225 million/dv to $21 million/dv. 

• Unit 3 cost range is $287 million/dv to $30million/dv. 

• Unit 4 cost range is $2.3 billion/dv1 to $29 million/dv. 

Attachment 3 contains a unit specific summary of the 98th percentile visibility 

impact for the three modeled technology scenarios (i.e., Pre-Consent Decree, Consent 

Decree, SNCR scenarios), includes the number of days above 0.5 dv threshold, and 

indicates the contribution of each pollutant associated with the 98th percentile visibility 

impact for each class I area. 

Visibility Summary with Nitrate Repartitioning and Constant Ammonia

As previously noted, the purpose of this analyses, and the previous November 

2007 and March 2008 analyses, was to perform visibility modeling using refined 

methodologies from those contained in the original BART submittal. However, PNM 

recognizes that NMED has previously requested additional visibility modeling be 

conducted using a constant ammonia background value of 1 ppb. While PNM does not 

believe analyses conducted using the constant ammonia background (1 ppb) is 

representative, analyses have been conducted based on the aforementioned modeling 

methodology and described scenarios for both the SJGS plant and individual units. The 

results of this analysis can be found in Attachment 3, Tables 21-40. 

Attachment 3 also contains tables summarizing the modeling results, the summary 

of the 98th percentile visibility impact for the three modeled technology scenarios (i.e., 

Pre-Consent Decree, Consent Decree, and SNCR scenarios), and the number of days 

above 0.5 dv threshold and the contribution of each pollutant associated with the 98th

percentile visibility impact for each class I area. 

 

1

 The visibility improvement realized for Unit 4 is 0.002 dv but is illustrated in Attachment 3, Table 20 as 

0.00 dv. 
Final BART Response 053008.doc 10 of 11 

Additional Considerations

The minimal visibility improvements discussed in this document for the variable 

ammonia case (or even the constant ammonia case) do not merit the large capital 

expenditure required to install SNCR. In addition to the prohibitive cost associated with 

SNCR, there are other important reasons that LNB, OFA and NN should be considered 

BART for the SJGS units. First, the LNB, OFA and NN systems being installed to meet 

the consent decree are state-of-the-art combustion controls. State-of-the-art combustion 

controls comprising of LNB, OFA and NN technologies were used to form the basis for 

the BART presumptive limits for NOx in the BART guidelines. Second, installation of 

SNCR requires ammonia to reduce NOx emissions. Specifically, in a SNCR system, 

ammonia is injected into the boiler. Any unreacted ammonia passes through the boiler 

and out the stack as ammonia emissions or ammonia slip. This additional ammonia 

would then be available to add to the ammonia background concentration, chemically 

react to form nitrates and sulfates, and potentially further increase the visibility impacts at 

the Class I areas. The additional ammonia slip was not considered in this analysis. 

Finally, the visibility results imply that visibility is influenced more by the SJGS’s sulfur 

emissions than by the reduction of NOx. However, sulfur emissions are not subject to 

BART requirements because New Mexico participates in the WRAP emissions trading 

program. Therefore, LNB, OFA and NN should be considered BART for NOx control on 

the SJGS units. 

Conclusion

As noted in this document, PNM’s further investigation of additional refinements 

to the June 2007 BART CALPUFF air dispersion modeling analyses to yield more 

realistic regional haze impacts was warranted. These analyses included nitrate 

repartitioning and more realistic ammonia background concentrations based on 

monitored values at several western Class I areas, as well as, the additional ammonia 

study from western Wyoming. The conclusion of this study re-iterate and further support 

the overall findings of the June 2007 that installation of SNCR systems at the SJGS 

provide minimal visibility improvements and would require significant capital 

expenditure and modifications that will impact many areas of the plant including boiler 

draft systems, air heater performance, and ash handling. The results from the analyses 

further substantiate that the addition of SNCR technology does not yield a benefit nor 

meet the intended goal of BART. Specifically, these analyses indicate: 
Final BART Response 053008.doc 11 of 11 

• The addition of SNCR technology on a plant-wide or individual unit basis shows 

less than a 0.5 dv improvement for all Class I areas including the four Class I 

areas located in New Mexico. 

• Both the total annual costs evaluated and the cost-effectiveness ($/dv) are 

prohibitive given the minimal improvements realized. 

Therefore, as previously noted, given the minimal visibility improvement to the 

class I areas in the BART analysis, the recommended BART control for SJGS is LNB, 

OFA, and a NN for NOx control and PJFF for PM control. 
Attachment 1 
PNM BART Additional NOx Technology Control Strategy Review

Last Up

Total Total

Emission Expected Expected Expected Capital Annualized Incremental

Performance Emission Emission Emission Investment Cost Cost Cost Ene

Level Rate Rate Reduction (TCI) (TAC) Effectiveness Effectiveness Imp

All Feasible Technologies (lb/MBtu) (lb/h) (ton/yr) (ton/yr) (1,000$) (1,000$) ($/ton) ($/ton) (1,0

SJGS Unit 1

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) 0.07 259.5 966 3,174 156,805 20,525 6,466 2,844 1,4

SNCR/SCR Hybrid 0.18 667.3 2,484 1,656 104,436 16,207 9,786 15,490 70SNCR 0.24 889.7 3,312 828 15,321 3,380 4,082 3

SJGS Unit 2

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) 0.07 258.2 961 3,158 169,251 21,891 6,932 3,457 1,4

SNCR/SCR Hybrid 0.18 663.8 2,471 1,648 108,628 16,670 10,117 16,132 34SNCR 0.24 885.1 3,295 824 15,321 3,380 4,103 3

SJGS Unit 3

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) 0.07 403.1 1,501 4,931 215,568 28,359 5,752 1,167 2,1

SNCR/SCR Hybrid 0.18 1,036.4 3,859 2,572 168,507 25,606 9,954 16,335 50SNCR 0.24 1,381.9 5,145 1,286 18,977 4,596 3,573 3

SJGS Unit 4

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) 0.07 395.4 1,472 4,837 199,558 26,592 5,497 753 2,2

SNCR/SCR Hybrid 0.18 1,016.8 3,786 2,524 161,572 24,849 9,846 16,050 50SNCR 0.24 1,355.8 5,047 1,262 18,977 4,596 3,642 3

Notes:1. All costs are in 2007$.2. Expected emission rates (ton/yr) calculations were based on 85 percent unit capacity factor (referer to Appendix A Design Basis).3. Expected emission reduction (ton/yr) calculations were based on the consent decree upgrades control effectiveness as shown in Table 4-1.4. TCI and TAC are referenced from Appendix C Cost Analysis Summary.5. Cost-effectiveness ($/ton) is defined as ratio of TAC over Expected Emission Reduction (ton/yr).6. Expected emission reduction is based on annual emission reduction from consent decree upgrade emission levels (Table 4-1).7. Incremental cost effectiveness are based on increments in expected emission reduction (ton/yr)

Table 7-1

Impact Analysis and Cost Effectiveness Results of Additional NOx Control Technologies for SJGS
Design Concept Definition 

Site Name San Juan Generating Station Units 1, 2, 3, 4 

Client Name PNM Process Technology Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction 

Process Description Addition of Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction (SNCR) process into boiler pendant superheat section. Generic SNCR technology 

considered to represent various vendor specific systems (i.e. FuelTech, Nalco-Mobotec). 

 Pollutant NOx (Unit 1) NOx (Unit 2) NOx (Unit 3) NOx (Unit 4) 

 Emissions 

 lb/MBtu 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 

 lb/h 1,112 1,106 1,727 1,695 

 Controlled Emissions 

 lb/MBtu 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 

 lb/h 890 885 1,382 1,356 

Inlet Flow Basis, acfm 2,082,166 2,082,819 3,205,572 3,144,890 

Pressure Drop Added, in. wg None 

Coal Source and Type New Mexico, Subbituminous 

 Capacity Factor 85.0% 

Consumables Reagent (Urea), lb/h 906 906 1,408 1,408 

 Water, gpm 39 39 60 60 

 Energy, kW 80 80 80 80 

Maintenance 3% of direct material cost. 

Byproduct Description No impact on ash sales. 

Other Up to 5 ppm ammonia slip. 

Location of Major Process Equipment Truck-filled reagent storage tank, reagent circulation unit in enclosure with metering and 

distribution module, wall-injectors and multi-nozzle lances (MNL) in boiler penetrations. 

Inlet/Outlet Connections and Interconnecting Ducts Dilution water to metering module, atomizing air to injectors and MNL, cooling water for MNL. 

Reagent Storage Reagent tank at grade. 

Control System Modifications SNCR controls interfaced into existing control system. 

Fan Modifications None. 

Power Supply/Aux Power Modifications Minimum impact/modifications. 

Enclosures Requirements Injection equipment enclosed in existing boiler building, enclosure for reagent circulation unit. 

Demolition or Relocation Requirements Penetrations into boiler wall for injectors and MNL, access platforms. 

Major Constructability Issues Routing of SNCR reagent supply lines. 

Significant Issues or Challenges Ammonia slip may cause buildup of ammonium bisulfate on the air heater, which may require 

more frequent cleaning, air heater modifications included. 

Other Assumptions: 

• No major impact in plant availability. 

• The site has sufficient area available to accommodate construction activities including, but not limited to, offices, laydown, and staging. 

• No boiler/duct stiffening included. 

• Air heater modifications included in analysis. 

• No impact on potential ash sales. 

• Reagent is urea solution. 

State of Availability Available. 

State of Applicability Applicable. 

Technical Feasibility Technically feasible. SNCR technology is generic and considered to represent various vendor specific systems (i.e. FuelTech, 

Nalco-Mobotec). 
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Technology: Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction - SJGS Unit 1 Date: 5/5/2008

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

SNCR system scope: $4,315,000 From vendor quote (FuelTech)

Reagent delivery system

Wall injectors and multiple nozzle lances

Automatic injector and lance retract system

Flue gas temperature monitors

Reagent storage tank $100,000 B&V cost estimate

NOx monitoring system $220,000 B&V cost estimate

Electrical system upgrades $189,000 B&V cost estimate

Instrumentation and control system $279,000 B&V cost estimate

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $5,103,000

Gross Receipt Tax $315,748 (CC) X 6.2%

Freight $255,150 (CC) X 5.0%

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $5,674,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $567,000 (PEC) X 10.0%

Handling & erection $1,702,000 (PEC) X 30.0%

Electrical $567,000 (PEC) X 10.0%

Piping $142,000 (PEC) X 2.5%

Insulation $0 (PEC) X 0.0%

Painting $0 (PEC) X 0.0%

Demolition $284,000 (PEC) X 5.0%

Relocation $113,000 (PEC) X 2.0%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $3,375,000

Air preheater modifications $1,071,000 B&V cost estimate

Site preparation $0 N/A

Buildings $0 N/A

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $10,120,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $708,000 (DC) X 7.0%

Owner's cost $506,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Construction management $1,012,000 (DC) X 10.0%

Start-up and spare parts $304,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Performance test $100,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate

Contingencies $2,024,000 (DC) X 20.0%

Total indirect costs (IC) $4,654,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $547,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $15,321,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated manpower level

Maintenance labor and materials $304,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $429,000

Variable annual costs

Reagent $1,417,000 906 lb/hr and 420 $/ton Engineering estimate

Auxiliary and ID fan power $36,000 80 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Estimate in vendor quote

Water $6,000 39 gpm and 0.33 $/1,000 gal Engineering estimate

Total variable annual costs $1,459,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $1,888,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $1,492,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $1,492,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $3,380,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Technology: Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction - SJGS Unit 2 Date: 5/5/2008

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

SNCR system scope: $4,315,000 From vendor quote (FuelTech)

Reagent delivery system

Wall injectors and multiple nozzle lances

Automatic injector and lance retract system

Flue gas temperature monitors

Reagent storage tank $100,000 B&V cost estimate

NOx monitoring system $220,000 B&V cost estimate

Electrical system upgrades $189,000 B&V cost estimate

Instrumentation and control system $279,000 B&V cost estimate

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $5,103,000

Gross Receipt Tax $315,748 (CC) X 6.2%

Freight $255,150 (CC) X 5.0%

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $5,674,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $567,000 (PEC) X 10.0%

Handling & erection $1,702,000 (PEC) X 30.0%

Electrical $567,000 (PEC) X 10.0%

Piping $142,000 (PEC) X 2.5%

Insulation $0 (PEC) X 0.0%

Painting $0 (PEC) X 0.0%

Demolition $284,000 (PEC) X 5.0%

Relocation $113,000 (PEC) X 2.0%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $3,375,000

Air preheater modifications $1,071,000 B&V cost estimate

Site preparation $0 N/A

Buildings $0 N/A

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $10,120,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $708,000 (DC) X 7.0%

Owner's cost $506,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Construction management $1,012,000 (DC) X 10.0%

Start-up and spare parts $304,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Performance test $100,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate

Contingencies $2,024,000 (DC) X 20.0%

Total indirect costs (IC) $4,654,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $547,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $15,321,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated manpower level

Maintenance labor and materials $304,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $429,000

Variable annual costs

Reagent $1,417,000 906 lb/hr and 420 $/ton Engineering estimate

Auxiliary and ID fan power $36,000 80 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Estimate in vendor quote

Water $6,000 39 gpm and 0.33 $/1,000 gal Engineering estimate

Total variable annual costs $1,459,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $1,888,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $1,492,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $1,492,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $3,380,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Technology: Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction - SJGS Unit 3 Date: 5/5/2008

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

SNCR system scope: $5,619,000 From vendor quote (FuelTech)

Reagent delivery system

Wall injectors and multiple nozzle lances

Automatic injector and lance retract system

Flue gas temperature monitors

Reagent storage tank $100,000 B&V cost estimate

NOx monitoring system $220,000 B&V cost estimate

Electrical system upgrades $242,000 B&V cost estimate

Instrumentation and control system $291,000 B&V cost estimate

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $6,472,000

Gross Receipt Tax $400,455 (CC) X 6.2%

Freight $323,600 (CC) X 5.0%

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $7,196,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $720,000 (PEC) X 10.0%

Handling & erection $2,159,000 (PEC) X 30.0%

Electrical $720,000 (PEC) X 10.0%

Piping $180,000 (PEC) X 2.5%

Insulation $0 (PEC) X 0.0%

Painting $0 (PEC) X 0.0%

Demolition $360,000 (PEC) X 5.0%

Relocation $144,000 (PEC) X 2.0%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $4,283,000

Air preheater modifications $1,071,000 B&V cost estimate

Site preparation $0 N/A

Buildings $0 N/A

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $12,550,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $879,000 (DC) X 7.0%

Owner's cost $628,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Construction management $1,255,000 (DC) X 10.0%

Start-up and spare parts $377,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Performance test $100,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate

Contingencies $2,510,000 (DC) X 20.0%

Total indirect costs (IC) $5,749,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $678,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $18,977,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated manpower level

Maintenance labor and materials $377,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $502,000

Variable annual costs

Reagent $2,201,000 1,408 lb/hr and 420 $/ton Engineering estimate

Auxiliary and ID fan power $36,000 80 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Estimate in vendor quote

Water $9,000 60 gpm and 0.33 $/1,000 gal Engineering estimate

Total variable annual costs $2,246,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $2,748,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $1,848,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $1,848,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $4,596,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Technology: Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction - SJGS Unit 4 Date: 5/5/2008

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

SNCR system scope: $5,619,000 From vendor quote (FuelTech)

Reagent delivery system

Wall injectors and multiple nozzle lances

Automatic injector and lance retract system

Flue gas temperature monitors

Reagent storage tank $100,000 B&V cost estimate

NOx monitoring system $220,000 B&V cost estimate

Electrical system upgrades $242,000 B&V cost estimate

Instrumentation and control system $291,000 B&V cost estimate

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $6,472,000

Gross Receipt Tax $400,455 (CC) X 6.2%

Freight $323,600 (CC) X 5.0%

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $7,196,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $720,000 (PEC) X 10.0%

Handling & erection $2,159,000 (PEC) X 30.0%

Electrical $720,000 (PEC) X 10.0%

Piping $180,000 (PEC) X 2.5%

Insulation $0 (PEC) X 0.0%

Painting $0 (PEC) X 0.0%

Demolition $360,000 (PEC) X 5.0%

Relocation $144,000 (PEC) X 2.0%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $4,283,000

Air preheater modifications $1,071,000 B&V cost estimate

Site preparation $0 N/A

Buildings $0 N/A

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $12,550,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $879,000 (DC) X 7.0%

Owner's cost $628,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Construction management $1,255,000 (DC) X 10.0%

Start-up and spare parts $377,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Performance test $100,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate

Contingencies $2,510,000 (DC) X 20.0%

Total indirect costs (IC) $5,749,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $678,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $18,977,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated manpower level

Maintenance labor and materials $377,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $502,000

Variable annual costs

Reagent $2,201,000 1,408 lb/hr and 420 $/ton Engineering estimate

Auxiliary and ID fan power $36,000 80 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Estimate in vendor quote

Water $9,000 60 gpm and 0.33 $/1,000 gal Engineering estimate

Total variable annual costs $2,246,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $2,748,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $1,848,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $1,848,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $4,596,000
Attachment 2 
NH3 Monitoring in the Upper Green River Basin, 

Wyoming 

Extended Abstract #70 

John V. Molenar1

H. James Sewell2

Jeffrey Collett3

Cassie Archuleta1

Mark Tigges1 

Florian M. Schwandner3

Suresh Raja3

1

 Air Resource Specialists, Inc., 1901 Sharp Point Drive, Suite E, Fort Collins, CO 

80525 

2

 Shell Exploration & Production Company, 4582 S. Ulster Street Parkway, Suite 500, 

Denver, CO 80237 

3

 Department of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, 

CO 80523-1371 

Principal Contact: John V. Molenar, Vice President, Air Resource Specialists, Inc., 

1901 Sharp Point Drive, Suite E, Ft. Collins, CO 80525, phone: 970-484-7941, Fax: 970-

484-3423, email: jmolenar@air-resource.com 

INTRODUCTION

A long term ammonia air monitoring study was initiated in December, 2006 at Boulder, 

Wyoming, by Shell Exploration & Production Company. The monitoring site is located 

in the Upper Green River Basin of western Wyoming southwest of the Bridger 

Wilderness, a Class I area with an IMPROVE monitoring site. This region is 

experiencing rapid development of natural gas resources with possible consequences of 

air quality and visibility impacts in the Bridger Wilderness. Only very limited short-term 

ammonia measurements were previously available for this region. Thus, the primary 

objective of this study is to characterize the local airborne nitrogen budget and, 

specifically, ammonia concentrations and concentrations of related gases and particles in 

the basin for at least one year. Gaseous and particulate samples were collected twice per 

week (integrated 3-day and 4-day samples) beginning December 15, 2006 and will 

continue through May, 2008. Samples were collected using coated annular denuders and 

stacked filters in a University Research Glassworks (URG) sampler. The Colorado State 

University Atmospheric Science Department provided laboratory-prepared sample media 

and laboratory analysis for gas and particle concentrations. Standard operating 

procedures, technical instructions, and a QAPP for instrument installation, operation and 

maintenance, field sampling, filter handling, and laboratory analyses were developed and 

submitted to Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality – Air Quality Division. 
MONITORING AND LABORATORY PROCEDURES 

Table 1 lists the instrumentation used and parameters monitored for the Boulder station 

ammonia study. Scheduled denuder and filter changes were performed twice per week, 

providing three- to four-day integrated samples for the duration of the study period. 

Ammonia concentrations and the concentrations of related gases and particles were 

measured using coated annular denuders and stacked filters in a University Research 

Glassworks (URG) sampler. The Colorado State University Atmospheric Science 

Department provided laboratory-prepared sample media and laboratory analysis for gas 

and particle concentrations. The two-channel sampler operated continuously, the air flow 

being controlled by a programmable pump with a mass flow sensor, and subsequent 

volumetric gas flow meters. The sampling method requires that metered air is drawn 

through a PM2.5 size selective cyclone inlet, then through a series of annular denuders and 

filters. The denuders are coated with an acid-based substrate to collect ammonia gas. A 

second denuder is coated with NaCl to collect gaseous nitric acid. A subsequent stack of 

two filters is utilized to collect particles. A nylon filter collects particles, and a second, 

acid-coated filter collects any ammonia volatilized from collected, semi-volatile 

ammonium nitrate particles. The nylon filter retains any nitric acid volatilized from 

particulate ammonium nitrate. Following field exposure, the denuders, filters, and field 

data logs are sent to the CSU lab for chemical extraction and analysis. Total sampler air 

volume from the data sheet is then used to calculate concentrations. 

Table 1: Instrumentation and Monitored Parameters Boulder, Wyoming Air Quality 

Station 

Component Instrumentation Height Frequency Parameters 

GASEOUS URG denuders 1.5m 

3-day and 4-

day integrated

samples 

Ammonia, NH3

Nitric Acid, 

HNO3

PARTICULATE URG stacked 

filters 1.5m 

3-day and 4-

day integrated

samples 

Ammonium, 

NH4

+

Nitrate, NO3

-

Sulfate, SO4

2- 

RESULTS 

Figure 1 shows a timeline of gaseous and particulate concentrations from December, 

2006 – January, 2008. Figure 2 plots the monthly mean, standard deviation, minimum, 

and maximum NH3 concentrations. NH3 concentrations are below 1 ppbv for most of the 

monitoring period, peaking in August, 2007 at 1.55 ppbv. Elevated NH3 concentrations 

here coincide with warmer summer months. A shift in ammonium nitrate equilibrium 

toward the gas phase might be responsible for some of this increase, although an increase 

in total reduced nitrogen (ammonium + ammonia) during the summer suggests that 

changes in emissions and or transport patterns are likely also important contributors. 
Figure 1: Timeline of measured concentrations. 

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

12/1512/2212/29

1/5

1/121/191/26

2/22/9

2/162/23

3/23/9

3/163/233/30

4/6

4/134/204/27

5/4

5/115/185/25

6/16/8

6/156/226/29

7/6

7/137/207/27

8/3

8/108/178/248/31

9/7

9/149/219/2810/5

10/1210/1910/26

11/211/9

11/1611/2311/30

12/7

12/1412/2112/28

1/4

1/111/18

date 2006-2008

NH3 (g) NH4 + (p)

HNO3 (g) NO3 - (p)

SO4 2- (p)

g m-3 ion / u concentrat

Figure 2: 2007 monthly and annual NH3 concentration data 

Three events stand out: high particulate NO3

-

 in January, 2007; high particulate NO3

-

 in 

December, 2007 – January, 2008; and high particulate SO4

-2 in May, 2007. The winter 

nitrate events are interesting as all reduced nitrogen is present as particle phase 

ammonium while considerable nitric acid remains in the gas phase. Sufficient increases 

in ammonia emissions during this period could have substantially increased PM2.5

concentrations by further ammonium nitrate formation. 

Figure 3 displays a timeline of the gas/particle partitioning of the measured species for 

the same time period. Particulate sulfate (red) dominates throughout most of the year. 

Reduced nitrogen (green bars) shows an increased partitioning into the gas phase 
(ammonium to ammonia). Increased particulate nitrate in late winter is consistent with 

thermodynamic expectations: ammonium nitrate formation is favored at lower 

temperatures and higher relative humidities. 

Figure 3: Timeline of gas-particle partitioning. Concentrations in μg/m3

, top bar 

stack for particles, bottom bar stack for gases. 

gas-particle partitioning

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

12/1512/29

1/121/26

2/9

2/23

3/9

3/23

4/6

4/20

5/4

5/18

6/1

6/156/297/137/278/108/24

9/7

9/2110/5

10/19

11/2

11/1611/3012/1412/28

1/111/25

start date

concentration / ug m-3

NH4 + (p) NO3 - (p)

SO4 2- (p) NH3 (g)

HNO3 (g)

PM

GAS

RESIDENCE TIME ANALYSIS 

Ammonia weighted back trajectories were used to identify the geographic source areas 

most likely to contribute to the highest measured ammonia days. Back trajectory analyses 

use interpolated measured or modeled meteorological fields to estimate the most likely 

central path over geographical areas that provided air to a receptor at a given time. The 

method essentially follows a parcel of air backward in hourly steps for a specified length 

of time. Back trajectories account for the impact of wind direction and wind speed on 

delivery of emissions to the receptor, but do not account for chemical transformation, 

dispersion and deposition of emissions.

Trajectories were generated using the Hybrid-Single Particle Lagrangian Integrated 

Trajectory (HYSPLIT) model developed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration’s (NOAA) Air Resources Laboratory (ARL). Detailed information 

regarding the trajectory model and these data sets can be found on NOAA’s Web site 

(http://www.arl.noaa.gov/ready/hysplit4.html). 

Three back trajectories were generated per day, including end times of 0400, 1200 and 

2000 MST and end heights of 100 m. Each hourly point along a 72-hour back trajectory 

paths was weighted with measured ammonia concentration corresponding to the end date 

of each trajectory. The ammonia values associated with each hourly point were then 

summed and normalized into 1/4 degree horizontal grid cells of latitude and longitude. 

Figure 4 presents a map of the ammonia weighted residence time for 2007. One path of 

influence follows the Snake River from Idaho to the Columbia River. This is a significant 
agriculture region. Another distinct path is from the South-Southwest along I-15 to 

Nevada then along the Colorado River. In addition to the major urban areas of Salt Lake 

City and Las Vegas, this pathway includes the agriculture regions of Star Valley north of 

Salt Lake City, the Wasatch front in Utah, and the Colorado River Basin. 

Figure 4: NH3 weighted residence time analysis for 2007. 

SUMMARY 

A 15 month study in the Upper Green River Basin of Wyoming measuring ammonia and 

nitric acid gasses and ammonium, nitrate, and sulfate particles has been completed. The 

results of the study show that in the Upper Green River Basin of Wyoming 2007 

ammonia concentrations are (1) quite variable throughout the year, (2) are below or near 

detectable limits from December through late February, (3) peak in August at 1.55 ppbv, 

and (4) have a yearly mean value of 0.24 ppbv. NH3 weighted Residence time analysis 

indicates that much of the NH3 present is transported into the region from agriculture and 

urban areas to the West and Southwest. 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 1 of 41 

Attachment 3
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 2 of 41 

Table 1 

SJGS Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.92 1.76 1.82 1.83 1.92 

Bandelier 1.31 1.86 1.51 1.56 1.86 

Black Canyon 1.14 1.34 1.40 1.29 1.40 

Canyonlands 2.59 2.04 2.00 2.21 2.59 

Capitol Reef 1.97 1.16 1.34 1.49 1.97 

Grand Canyon 1.14 0.93 0.81 0.96 1.14 

Great Sand Dunes 0.85 1.00 0.82 0.89 1.00 

La Garita 1.15 1.30 1.14 1.20 1.30 

Maroon Bells 0.67 0.78 0.63 0.70 0.78 

Mesa Verde 4.20 4.09 4.85 4.38 4.85 

Pecos 1.40 1.33 1.26 1.33 1.40 

Petrified Forest 1.13 0.79 0.74 0.88 1.13 

San Pedro 1.78 2.37 1.96 2.04 2.37 

West Elk 0.99 1.15 0.94 1.03 1.15 

Weminuche 1.51 1.85 1.69 1.69 1.85 

Wheeler Peak 1.00 0.95 1.05 1.00 1.05 

Overall 1.53 4.85 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 3 of 41 

Table 2 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results 

SJGS Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.69 1.65 1.49 1.61 1.69 

Bandelier 1.04 1.56 1.20 1.27 1.56 

Black Canyon 0.95 1.15 1.07 1.05 1.15 

Canyonlands 2.26 1.73 1.68 1.89 2.26 

Capitol Reef 1.81 0.82 1.05 1.23 1.81 

Grand Canyon 0.97 0.76 0.57 0.77 0.97 

Great Sand Dunes 0.63 0.71 0.64 0.66 0.71 

La Garita 0.86 0.94 0.90 0.90 0.94 

Maroon Bells 0.54 0.56 0.51 0.54 0.56 

Mesa Verde 3.38 3.53 3.80 3.57 3.80 

Pecos 1.05 1.09 1.00 1.05 1.09 

Petrified Forest 0.82 0.60 0.53 0.65 0.82 

San Pedro 1.40 2.01 1.56 1.66 2.01 

West Elk 0.80 0.91 0.83 0.85 0.91 

Weminuche 1.15 1.48 1.34 1.33 1.48 

Wheeler Peak 0.75 0.86 0.89 0.83 0.89 

Overall 1.24 3.80 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 4 of 41 

Table 3 

SNCR Visibility Modeling Results 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.61 1.50 1.27 1.46 1.61 

Bandelier 0.92 1.37 1.15 1.14 1.37 

Black Canyon 0.84 1.00 0.97 0.94 1.00 

Canyonlands 2.15 1.61 1.61 1.79 2.15 

Capitol Reef 1.64 0.72 1.00 1.12 1.64 

Grand Canyon 0.85 0.65 0.57 0.69 0.85 

Great Sand Dunes 0.58 0.62 0.52 0.57 0.62 

La Garita 0.76 0.80 0.78 0.78 0.80 

Maroon Bells 0.51 0.48 0.44 0.48 0.51 

Mesa Verde 3.36 3.22 3.58 3.38 3.58 

Pecos 0.90 0.94 0.91 0.91 0.94 

Petrified Forest 0.77 0.54 0.50 0.61 0.77 

San Pedro 1.31 1.80 1.48 1.53 1.80 

West Elk 0.74 0.77 0.71 0.74 0.77 

Weminuche 1.03 1.35 1.16 1.18 1.35 

Wheeler Peak 0.68 0.77 0.75 0.74 0.77 

Overall 1.13 3.58 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 5 of 41 

Table 4

SJGS Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visibility Modeling Results)

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) Improvement ($/dv)

(98th Percentile, see Note 1)

Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for 

each Class 1 Area) (see Note 4)

Class 1 Area

Pre-Consent 

Decree Consent Decree SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

Consent Decree

Consent Decree 

to SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to Consent 

Decree

Consent Decree to 

SNCR

Arches 1.92 1.69 1.61 0.23 0.08 0.31 224,751,092 207,168,831 Bandelier 1.86 1.56 1.37 0.31 0.19 0.50 167,648,208 83,957,895 Black Canyon 1.40 1.15 1.00 0.26 0.15 0.41 201,835,294 105,642,384 Canyonlands 2.59 2.26 2.15 0.33 0.12 0.44 158,363,077 136,341,880 Capitol Reef 1.97 1.81 1.64 0.16 0.17 0.33 319,677,019 93,835,294 Grand Canyon 1.14 0.97 0.85 0.17 0.12 0.29 304,544,379 135,186,441 Great Sand Dunes 1.00 0.71 0.62 0.29 0.09 0.38 179,331,010 181,272,727 La Garita 1.30 0.94 0.80 0.36 0.14 0.50 142,966,667 113,942,857 Maroon Bells 0.78 0.56 0.51 0.22 0.05 0.27 236,091,743 295,407,407 Mesa Verde 4.85 3.80 3.58 1.06 0.21 1.27 48,692,526 74,542,056 Pecos 1.40 1.09 0.94 0.31 0.16 0.46 168,196,078 100,962,025 Petrified Forest 1.13 0.82 0.77 0.31 0.04 0.36 165,491,961 354,488,889 San Pedro 2.37 2.01 1.80 0.36 0.21 0.57 142,966,667 75,245,283 West Elk 1.15 0.91 0.77 0.24 0.14 0.38 216,252,101 112,338,028 Weminuche 1.85 1.48 1.35 0.37 0.13 0.50 138,727,763 119,939,850 Wheeler Peak 1.05 0.89 0.77 0.16 0.13 0.29 323,698,113 126,603,175 

Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data.2. NI = No Improvement3. NA = Not Applicable4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000):

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree $51,468

Consent Decree to SNCR $15,952Pre-Consent Decree to SNCR $67,420
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 6 of 41 

Table 5 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 1 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.82 0.68 0.60 0.70 0.82 

Bandelier 0.31 0.49 0.54 0.45 0.54 

Black Canyon 0.35 0.37 0.38 0.37 0.38 

Canyonlands 1.10 0.84 0.71 0.88 1.10 

Capitol Reef 0.76 0.23 0.32 0.44 0.76 

Grand Canyon 0.31 0.21 0.16 0.23 0.31 

Great Sand Dunes 0.18 0.20 0.17 0.18 0.20 

La Garita 0.26 0.28 0.29 0.28 0.29 

Maroon Bells 0.18 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.18 

Mesa Verde 1.51 1.79 1.67 1.66 1.79 

Pecos 0.29 0.31 0.35 0.32 0.35 

Petrified Forest 0.25 0.16 0.14 0.18 0.25 

San Pedro 0.61 0.73 0.63 0.66 0.73 

West Elk 0.27 0.28 0.25 0.27 0.28 

Weminuche 0.37 0.54 0.45 0.45 0.54 

Wheeler Peak 0.24 0.25 0.26 0.25 0.26 

Overall 0.47 1.79 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 7 of 41 

Table 6 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 1 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.69 0.54 0.52 0.58 0.69 

Bandelier 0.24 0.40 0.37 0.34 0.40 

Black Canyon 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.29 0.29 

Canyonlands 1.00 0.65 0.57 0.74 1.00 

Capitol Reef 0.57 0.18 0.23 0.33 0.57 

Grand Canyon 0.27 0.16 0.12 0.18 0.27 

Great Sand Dunes 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 

La Garita 0.19 0.21 0.21 0.20 0.21 

Maroon Bells 0.14 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.14 

Mesa Verde 1.35 1.40 1.27 1.34 1.40 

Pecos 0.23 0.24 0.27 0.25 0.27 

Petrified Forest 0.19 0.13 0.11 0.14 0.19 

San Pedro 0.44 0.59 0.50 0.51 0.59 

West Elk 0.22 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.22 

Weminuche 0.31 0.43 0.35 0.36 0.43 

Wheeler Peak 0.19 0.17 0.20 0.19 0.20 

Overall 0.37 1.40 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 8 of 41 

Table 7 

SNCR Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 1 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.58 0.44 0.45 0.49 0.58 

Bandelier 0.20 0.33 0.30 0.28 0.33 

Black Canyon 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 

Canyonlands 0.87 0.53 0.49 0.63 0.87 

Capitol Reef 0.46 0.15 0.21 0.27 0.46 

Grand Canyon 0.22 0.14 0.12 0.16 0.22 

Great Sand Dunes 0.12 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.13 

La Garita 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 

Maroon Bells 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.10 0.11 

Mesa Verde 1.19 1.24 1.13 1.19 1.24 

Pecos 0.19 0.21 0.23 0.21 0.23 

Petrified Forest 0.17 0.11 0.10 0.13 0.17 

San Pedro 0.36 0.48 0.43 0.42 0.48 

West Elk 0.18 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.18 

Weminuche 0.25 0.36 0.30 0.31 0.36 

Wheeler Peak 0.16 0.14 0.18 0.16 0.18 

Overall 0.31 1.24 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 9 of 41 

Table 8

Unit 1 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visibility Modeling Resul

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) Improvement ($

(98th Percentile, see Note 1)

Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for 

each Class 1 Area) (see Note 4)

Class 1 Area

Pre-Consent 

Decree Consent Decree SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

Consent Decree

Consent Decree 

to SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to Consent 

Decree

Consent Decree 

SNCR

Arches 0.82 0.69 0.58 0.13 0.11 0.24 91,146,154 29,649,123 Bandelier 0.54 0.40 0.33 0.14 0.07 0.21 84,635,714 46,301,370 Black Canyon 0.38 0.29 0.23 0.09 0.06 0.15 131,655,556 55,409,836 Canyonlands 1.10 1.00 0.87 0.10 0.13 0.23 118,490,000 26,000,000 Capitol Reef 0.76 0.57 0.46 0.19 0.11 0.30 62,363,158 30,727,273 Grand Canyon 0.31 0.27 0.22 0.04 0.05 0.09 296,225,000 66,274,510 Great Sand Dunes 0.20 0.14 0.13 0.06 0.02 0.08 197,483,333 225,333,333 La Garita 0.29 0.21 0.17 0.08 0.04 0.12 148,112,500 93,888,889 Maroon Bells 0.18 0.14 0.11 0.04 0.03 0.07 296,225,000 120,714,286 Mesa Verde 1.79 1.40 1.24 0.39 0.16 0.55 30,382,051 21,257,862 Pecos 0.35 0.27 0.23 0.08 0.04 0.12 148,112,500 93,888,889 Petrified Forest 0.25 0.19 0.17 0.06 0.02 0.08 197,483,333 140,833,333 San Pedro 0.73 0.59 0.48 0.14 0.11 0.25 84,635,714 29,911,504 West Elk 0.28 0.22 0.18 0.06 0.04 0.10 197,483,333 88,947,368 Weminuche 0.54 0.43 0.36 0.11 0.07 0.18 107,718,182 51,212,121 Wheeler Peak 0.26 0.20 0.18 0.06 0.03 0.09 197,483,333 135,200,000 

Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data.2. NI = No Improvement3. NA = Not Applicable4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000):

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree $11,849

Consent Decree to SNCR $3,380Pre-Consent Decree to SNCR $15,229
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 10 of 41 

Table 9 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 2 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.83 0.64 0.58 0.68 0.83 

Bandelier 0.32 0.50 0.54 0.45 0.54 

Black Canyon 0.36 0.37 0.39 0.37 0.39 

Canyonlands 1.07 0.83 0.72 0.87 1.07 

Capitol Reef 0.78 0.23 0.31 0.44 0.78 

Grand Canyon 0.31 0.20 0.16 0.22 0.31 

Great Sand Dunes 0.19 0.21 0.17 0.19 0.21 

La Garita 0.26 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.29 

Maroon Bells 0.18 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.18 

Mesa Verde 1.49 1.82 1.66 1.66 1.82 

Pecos 0.29 0.31 0.36 0.32 0.36 

Petrified Forest 0.25 0.16 0.14 0.18 0.25 

San Pedro 0.63 0.73 0.64 0.67 0.73 

West Elk 0.27 0.29 0.26 0.27 0.29 

Weminuche 0.38 0.56 0.44 0.46 0.56 

Wheeler Peak 0.24 0.26 0.26 0.25 0.26 

Overall 0.47 1.82 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 11 of 41 

Table 10 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 2 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.69 0.54 0.52 0.58 0.69 

Bandelier 0.23 0.40 0.37 0.33 0.40 

Black Canyon 0.28 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.29 

Canyonlands 0.99 0.65 0.57 0.74 0.99 

Capitol Reef 0.57 0.18 0.23 0.33 0.57 

Grand Canyon 0.27 0.16 0.12 0.18 0.27 

Great Sand Dunes 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 

La Garita 0.19 0.21 0.21 0.20 0.21 

Maroon Bells 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.14 

Mesa Verde 1.35 1.40 1.26 1.34 1.40 

Pecos 0.23 0.24 0.27 0.25 0.27 

Petrified Forest 0.19 0.13 0.11 0.14 0.19 

San Pedro 0.44 0.58 0.50 0.51 0.58 

West Elk 0.22 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.22 

Weminuche 0.31 0.42 0.35 0.36 0.42 

Wheeler Peak 0.18 0.17 0.20 0.18 0.20 

Overall 0.37 1.40 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 12 of 41 

Table 11 

SNCR Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 2 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.57 0.44 0.44 0.48 0.57 

Bandelier 0.20 0.33 0.30 0.28 0.33 

Black Canyon 0.23 0.23 0.22 0.23 0.23 

Canyonlands 0.87 0.52 0.48 0.62 0.87 

Capitol Reef 0.46 0.15 0.21 0.27 0.46 

Grand Canyon 0.22 0.14 0.12 0.16 0.22 

Great Sand Dunes 0.12 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.13 

La Garita 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 

Maroon Bells 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.10 0.11 

Mesa Verde 1.19 1.24 1.13 1.18 1.24 

Pecos 0.19 0.21 0.23 0.21 0.23 

Petrified Forest 0.17 0.11 0.10 0.12 0.17 

San Pedro 0.36 0.48 0.43 0.42 0.48 

West Elk 0.18 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.18 

Weminuche 0.25 0.36 0.30 0.31 0.36 

Wheeler Peak 0.16 0.14 0.17 0.16 0.17 

Overall 0.31 1.24 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 13 of 41 

Table 12

Unit 2 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visibility Modeling Resul

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) Improvement ($

(98th Percentile, see Note 1)

Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for 

each Class 1 Area) (see Note 4)

Class 1 Area

Pre-Consent 

Decree Consent Decree SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

Consent Decree

Consent Decree 

to SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to Consent 

Decree

Consent Decree 

SNCR

Arches 0.83 0.69 0.57 0.14 0.12 0.26 86,728,571 28,888,889 Bandelier 0.54 0.40 0.33 0.14 0.08 0.22 86,728,571 45,066,667 Black Canyon 0.39 0.29 0.23 0.10 0.06 0.16 121,420,000 53,650,794 Canyonlands 1.07 0.99 0.87 0.08 0.12 0.20 151,775,000 27,258,065 Capitol Reef 0.78 0.57 0.46 0.21 0.11 0.32 57,819,048 30,178,571 Grand Canyon 0.31 0.27 0.22 0.04 0.05 0.09 303,550,000 65,000,000 Great Sand Dunes 0.21 0.14 0.13 0.07 0.02 0.09 173,457,143 225,333,333 La Garita 0.29 0.21 0.17 0.08 0.04 0.12 151,775,000 91,351,351 Maroon Bells 0.18 0.14 0.11 0.04 0.03 0.07 303,550,000 120,714,286 Mesa Verde 1.82 1.40 1.24 0.42 0.16 0.58 28,909,524 20,609,756 Pecos 0.36 0.27 0.23 0.09 0.04 0.13 134,911,111 88,947,368 Petrified Forest 0.25 0.19 0.17 0.06 0.03 0.09 202,366,667 135,200,000 San Pedro 0.73 0.58 0.48 0.15 0.11 0.26 80,946,667 32,190,476 West Elk 0.29 0.22 0.18 0.07 0.04 0.11 173,457,143 86,666,667 Weminuche 0.56 0.42 0.36 0.14 0.06 0.20 86,728,571 59,298,246 Wheeler Peak 0.26 0.20 0.17 0.06 0.03 0.09 202,366,667 130,000,000 

Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data.2. NI = No Improvement3. NA = Not Applicable4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000):

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree $12,142

Consent Decree to SNCR $3,380Pre-Consent Decree to SNCR $15,522
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 14 of 41 

Table 13 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 3 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.04 0.81 0.72 0.86 1.04 

Bandelier 0.53 0.81 0.71 0.68 0.81 

Black Canyon 0.58 0.53 0.59 0.57 0.59 

Canyonlands 1.44 1.04 0.96 1.15 1.44 

Capitol Reef 1.10 0.38 0.52 0.67 1.10 

Grand Canyon 0.48 0.33 0.26 0.36 0.48 

Great Sand Dunes 0.28 0.33 0.27 0.29 0.33 

La Garita 0.40 0.44 0.43 0.42 0.44 

Maroon Bells 0.24 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 

Mesa Verde 1.92 2.18 2.14 2.08 2.18 

Pecos 0.48 0.52 0.58 0.53 0.58 

Petrified Forest 0.43 0.25 0.24 0.31 0.43 

San Pedro 0.88 1.03 0.88 0.93 1.03 

West Elk 0.38 0.42 0.38 0.39 0.42 

Weminuche 0.59 0.82 0.65 0.69 0.82 

Wheeler Peak 0.37 0.39 0.37 0.38 0.39 

Overall 0.66 2.18 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 15 of 41 

Table 14 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 3 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.89 0.65 0.66 0.73 0.89 

Bandelier 0.39 0.57 0.61 0.52 0.61 

Black Canyon 0.44 0.41 0.46 0.44 0.46 

Canyonlands 1.15 0.85 0.79 0.93 1.15 

Capitol Reef 0.86 0.26 0.36 0.49 0.86 

Grand Canyon 0.35 0.24 0.19 0.26 0.35 

Great Sand Dunes 0.21 0.24 0.21 0.22 0.24 

La Garita 0.29 0.33 0.33 0.32 0.33 

Maroon Bells 0.20 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.20 

Mesa Verde 1.56 1.90 1.74 1.73 1.90 

Pecos 0.35 0.36 0.42 0.38 0.42 

Petrified Forest 0.29 0.18 0.17 0.21 0.29 

San Pedro 0.70 0.81 0.72 0.74 0.81 

West Elk 0.30 0.33 0.35 0.33 0.35 

Weminuche 0.44 0.64 0.50 0.53 0.64 

Wheeler Peak 0.28 0.31 0.28 0.29 0.31 

Overall 0.52 1.90 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 16 of 41 

Table 15 

SNCR Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 3 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.79 0.54 0.55 0.63 0.79 

Bandelier 0.32 0.50 0.50 0.44 0.50 

Black Canyon 0.36 0.33 0.38 0.36 0.38 

Canyonlands 1.01 0.71 0.68 0.80 1.01 

Capitol Reef 0.71 0.23 0.33 0.42 0.71 

Grand Canyon 0.28 0.20 0.18 0.22 0.28 

Great Sand Dunes 0.18 0.20 0.17 0.18 0.20 

La Garita 0.26 0.28 0.27 0.27 0.28 

Maroon Bells 0.16 0.16 0.14 0.15 0.16 

Mesa Verde 1.50 1.75 1.59 1.61 1.75 

Pecos 0.29 0.30 0.36 0.32 0.36 

Petrified Forest 0.27 0.17 0.16 0.20 0.27 

San Pedro 0.59 0.67 0.61 0.62 0.67 

West Elk 0.25 0.27 0.28 0.27 0.28 

Weminuche 0.36 0.54 0.41 0.44 0.54 

Wheeler Peak 0.22 0.26 0.24 0.24 0.26 

Overall 0.45 1.75 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 17 of 41 

Table 16

Unit 3 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visibility Modeling Resul

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) Improvement ($

(98th Percentile, see Note 1)

Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for 

each Class 1 Area) (see Note 4)

Class 1 Area

Pre-Consent 

Decree Consent Decree SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

Consent Decree

Consent Decree 

to SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to Consent 

Decree

Consent Decree 

SNCR

Arches 1.04 0.89 0.79 0.15 0.10 0.25 91,293,333 46,424,242 Bandelier 0.81 0.61 0.50 0.20 0.11 0.31 68,470,000 42,953,271 Black Canyon 0.59 0.46 0.38 0.13 0.08 0.21 105,338,462 56,740,741 Canyonlands 1.44 1.15 1.01 0.29 0.14 0.43 47,220,690 33,794,118 Capitol Reef 1.10 0.86 0.71 0.24 0.15 0.39 57,058,333 30,236,842 Grand Canyon 0.48 0.35 0.28 0.13 0.07 0.20 105,338,462 67,588,235 Great Sand Dunes 0.33 0.24 0.20 0.09 0.04 0.13 152,155,556 112,097,561 La Garita 0.44 0.33 0.28 0.11 0.05 0.16 124,490,909 91,920,000 Maroon Bells 0.25 0.20 0.16 0.05 0.04 0.09 273,880,000 124,216,216 Mesa Verde 2.18 1.90 1.75 0.28 0.15 0.43 48,907,143 29,844,156 Pecos 0.58 0.42 0.36 0.16 0.06 0.22 85,587,500 82,071,429 Petrified Forest 0.43 0.29 0.27 0.14 0.02 0.16 97,814,286 287,250,000 San Pedro 1.03 0.81 0.67 0.22 0.14 0.36 62,245,455 33,547,445 West Elk 0.42 0.35 0.28 0.07 0.07 0.14 195,628,571 66,608,696 Weminuche 0.82 0.64 0.54 0.18 0.10 0.28 76,077,778 47,875,000 Wheeler Peak 0.39 0.31 0.26 0.08 0.05 0.13 171,175,000 95,750,000 

Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data.2. NI = No Improvement3. NA = Not Applicable4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000):

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree $13,694

Consent Decree to SNCR $4,596Pre-Consent Decree to SNCR $18,290
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 18 of 41 

Table 17 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 4 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.05 0.84 0.74 0.88 1.05 

Bandelier 0.54 0.81 0.71 0.69 0.81 

Black Canyon 0.58 0.54 0.59 0.57 0.59 

Canyonlands 1.47 1.06 0.97 1.17 1.47 

Capitol Reef 1.11 0.38 0.53 0.67 1.11 

Grand Canyon 0.48 0.34 0.27 0.36 0.48 

Great Sand Dunes 0.29 0.34 0.27 0.30 0.34 

La Garita 0.40 0.45 0.43 0.43 0.45 

Maroon Bells 0.24 0.25 0.24 0.24 0.25 

Mesa Verde 1.94 2.18 2.15 2.09 2.18 

Pecos 0.48 0.52 0.59 0.53 0.59 

Petrified Forest 0.44 0.27 0.25 0.32 0.44 

San Pedro 0.89 1.04 0.88 0.94 1.04 

West Elk 0.38 0.43 0.39 0.40 0.43 

Weminuche 0.59 0.81 0.65 0.68 0.81 

Wheeler Peak 0.37 0.41 0.38 0.39 0.41 

Overall 0.67 2.18 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 19 of 41 

Table 18 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 4 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.88 0.65 0.63 0.72 0.88 

Bandelier 0.38 0.56 0.60 0.51 0.60 

Black Canyon 0.42 0.42 0.44 0.43 0.44 

Canyonlands 1.14 0.85 0.78 0.92 1.14 

Capitol Reef 0.86 0.26 0.35 0.49 0.86 

Grand Canyon 0.36 0.24 0.18 0.26 0.36 

Great Sand Dunes 0.21 0.23 0.21 0.22 0.23 

La Garita 0.28 0.32 0.32 0.31 0.32 

Maroon Bells 0.20 0.19 0.18 0.19 0.20 

Mesa Verde 1.55 1.89 1.73 1.72 1.89 

Pecos 0.34 0.35 0.41 0.37 0.41 

Petrified Forest 0.29 0.18 0.17 0.21 0.29 

San Pedro 0.69 0.80 0.69 0.73 0.80 

West Elk 0.30 0.33 0.33 0.32 0.33 

Weminuche 0.43 0.63 0.49 0.52 0.63 

Wheeler Peak 0.28 0.30 0.28 0.29 0.30 

Overall 0.51 1.89 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 20 of 41 

Table 19 

SNCR Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 4 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.79 0.54 0.53 0.62 0.79 

Bandelier 0.31 0.49 0.49 0.43 0.49 

Black Canyon 0.35 0.34 0.37 0.35 0.37 

Canyonlands 1.01 0.71 0.67 0.80 1.01 

Capitol Reef 0.71 0.23 0.32 0.42 0.71 

Grand Canyon 0.29 0.20 0.17 0.22 0.29 

Great Sand Dunes 0.18 0.19 0.16 0.18 0.19 

La Garita 0.25 0.27 0.26 0.26 0.27 

Maroon Bells 0.17 0.16 0.14 0.15 0.17 

Mesa Verde 1.49 1.73 1.58 1.60 1.73 

Pecos 0.29 0.30 0.36 0.32 0.36 

Petrified Forest 0.29 0.17 0.17 0.21 0.29 

San Pedro 0.69 0.66 0.69 0.68 0.69 

West Elk 0.25 0.27 0.26 0.26 0.27 

Weminuche 0.36 0.54 0.40 0.43 0.54 

Wheeler Peak 0.22 0.26 0.23 0.24 0.26 

Overall 0.45 1.73 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 21 of 41 

Table 20

Unit 4 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visibility Modeling Resul

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) Improvement ($

(98th Percentile, see Note 1)

Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for 

each Class 1 Area) (see Note 4)

Class 1 Area

Pre-Consent 

Decree Consent Decree SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

Consent Decree

Consent Decree 

to SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to Consent 

Decree

Consent Decree 

SNCR

Arches 1.05 0.88 0.79 0.17 0.10 0.27 81,076,471 48,378,947 Bandelier 0.81 0.60 0.49 0.21 0.11 0.32 65,633,333 42,555,556 Black Canyon 0.59 0.44 0.37 0.15 0.08 0.23 91,886,667 61,280,000 Canyonlands 1.47 1.14 1.01 0.33 0.13 0.46 41,766,667 35,627,907 Capitol Reef 1.11 0.86 0.71 0.25 0.15 0.40 55,132,000 30,039,216 Grand Canyon 0.48 0.36 0.29 0.12 0.07 0.19 114,858,333 67,588,235 Great Sand Dunes 0.34 0.23 0.19 0.11 0.04 0.15 125,300,000 127,666,667 La Garita 0.45 0.32 0.27 0.13 0.05 0.18 106,023,077 99,913,043 Maroon Bells 0.25 0.20 0.17 0.05 0.04 0.09 275,660,000 131,314,286 Mesa Verde 2.18 1.89 1.73 0.29 0.16 0.45 47,527,586 28,725,000 Pecos 0.59 0.41 0.36 0.18 0.05 0.23 76,572,222 91,920,000 Petrified Forest 0.44 0.29 0.29 0.15 0.00 0.15 91,886,667 2,298,000,00San Pedro 1.04 0.80 0.69 0.24 0.11 0.35 57,429,167 42,555,556 West Elk 0.43 0.33 0.27 0.10 0.06 0.16 137,830,000 76,600,000 Weminuche 0.81 0.63 0.54 0.18 0.09 0.27 76,572,222 49,419,355 Wheeler Peak 0.41 0.30 0.26 0.11 0.04 0.15 125,300,000 106,883,721 

Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data.2. NI = No Improvement3. NA = Not Applicable4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000):

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree $13,783

Consent Decree to SNCR $4,596Pre-Consent Decree to SNCR $18,379
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 22 of 41 

Table 21 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results 

SJGS Constant Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 3.88 2.93 3.04 3.28 3.88 

Bandelier 1.76 2.55 2.83 2.38 2.83 

Black Canyon 1.97 1.95 2.15 2.02 2.15 

Canyonlands 5.13 3.81 3.75 4.23 5.13 

Capitol Reef 3.75 1.20 1.61 2.19 3.75 

Grand Canyon 1.76 1.28 0.92 1.32 1.76 

Great Sand Dunes 1.09 1.10 0.96 1.05 1.10 

La Garita 1.46 1.45 1.52 1.48 1.52 

Maroon Bells 0.89 0.85 0.91 0.88 0.91 

Mesa Verde 6.04 5.98 5.85 5.96 6.04 

Pecos 1.59 1.93 2.23 1.92 2.23 

Petrified Forest 1.34 0.86 0.78 0.99 1.34 

San Pedro 3.47 3.47 3.35 3.43 3.47 

West Elk 1.45 1.47 1.42 1.45 1.47 

Weminuche 2.01 2.57 2.25 2.28 2.57 

Wheeler Peak 1.32 1.44 1.35 1.37 1.44 

Overall 2.26 6.04 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 23 of 41 

Table 22 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results 

SJGS Constant Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 3.63 2.82 2.71 3.05 3.63 

Bandelier 1.32 2.07 2.14 1.84 2.14 

Black Canyon 1.49 1.56 1.76 1.60 1.76 

Canyonlands 4.80 3.29 3.05 3.71 4.80 

Capitol Reef 2.89 0.93 1.24 1.69 2.89 

Grand Canyon 1.46 0.98 0.68 1.04 1.46 

Great Sand Dunes 0.83 0.80 0.71 0.78 0.83 

La Garita 1.08 1.13 1.15 1.12 1.15 

Maroon Bells 0.70 0.66 0.65 0.67 0.70 

Mesa Verde 5.27 5.67 5.10 5.35 5.67 

Pecos 1.20 1.47 1.67 1.45 1.67 

Petrified Forest 0.96 0.66 0.60 0.74 0.96 

San Pedro 2.68 2.91 2.78 2.79 2.91 

West Elk 1.12 1.12 1.09 1.11 1.12 

Weminuche 1.56 2.00 1.68 1.75 2.00 

Wheeler Peak 0.96 1.06 1.15 1.06 1.15 

Overall 1.86 5.67 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 24 of 41 

Table 23 

SNCR Visibility Modeling Results 

Constant Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 3.06 2.31 2.22 2.53 3.06 

Bandelier 1.09 1.76 1.76 1.54 1.76 

Black Canyon 1.22 1.26 1.44 1.30 1.44 

Canyonlands 4.04 2.72 2.53 3.10 4.04 

Capitol Reef 2.36 0.80 1.12 1.42 2.36 

Grand Canyon 1.18 0.81 0.59 0.86 1.18 

Great Sand Dunes 0.69 0.65 0.59 0.64 0.69 

La Garita 0.87 0.90 0.97 0.91 0.97 

Maroon Bells 0.56 0.54 0.52 0.54 0.56 

Mesa Verde 4.63 5.30 4.74 4.89 5.30 

Pecos 1.01 1.23 1.38 1.20 1.38 

Petrified Forest 0.89 0.54 0.53 0.65 0.89 

San Pedro 2.19 2.61 2.34 2.38 2.61 

West Elk 0.90 0.91 0.90 0.90 0.91 

Weminuche 1.29 1.77 1.45 1.50 1.77 

Wheeler Peak 0.89 0.86 0.93 0.89 0.93 

Overall 1.58 5.30 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 25 of 41 

Table 24

SJGS Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visibility Modeling Result

Constant Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) Improvement ($

(98th Percentile, see Note 1)

Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for 

each Class 1 Area) (see Note 4)

Class 1 Area

Pre-Consent 

Decree Consent Decree SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

Consent Decree

Consent Decree 

to SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to Consent 

Decree

Consent Decree 

SNCR

Arches 3.88 3.63 3.06 0.25 0.57 0.82 205,872,000 27,888,112 Bandelier 2.83 2.14 1.76 0.69 0.38 1.07 74,591,304 42,312,997 Black Canyon 2.15 1.76 1.44 0.39 0.33 0.72 131,969,231 49,083,077 Canyonlands 5.13 4.80 4.04 0.33 0.76 1.09 155,963,636 20,879,581 Capitol Reef 3.75 2.89 2.36 0.86 0.53 1.39 59,846,512 30,098,113 Grand Canyon 1.76 1.46 1.18 0.30 0.28 0.58 171,560,000 56,367,491 Great Sand Dunes 1.10 0.83 0.69 0.27 0.14 0.41 190,622,222 117,294,118 La Garita 1.52 1.15 0.97 0.37 0.18 0.55 139,102,703 86,695,652 Maroon Bells 0.91 0.70 0.56 0.21 0.14 0.35 245,085,714 113,134,752 Mesa Verde 6.04 5.67 5.30 0.37 0.37 0.74 139,102,703 42,766,756 Pecos 2.23 1.67 1.38 0.56 0.29 0.85 91,907,143 54,258,503 Petrified Forest 1.34 0.96 0.89 0.38 0.08 0.46 135,442,105 212,693,333 San Pedro 3.47 2.91 2.61 0.56 0.30 0.86 91,907,143 53,173,333 West Elk 1.47 1.12 0.91 0.35 0.21 0.56 147,051,429 77,062,802 Weminuche 2.57 2.00 1.77 0.57 0.23 0.80 90,294,737 69,056,277 Wheeler Peak 1.44 1.15 0.93 0.29 0.22 0.51 177,475,862 73,851,852 

Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data.2. NI = No Improvement3. NA = Not Applicable4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000):

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree $51,468

Consent Decree to SNCR $15,952Pre-Consent Decree to SNCR $67,420
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 26 of 41 

Table 25 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 1 

Constant Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.10 0.85 0.82 0.92 1.10 

Bandelier 0.36 0.64 0.63 0.54 0.64 

Black Canyon 0.39 0.43 0.48 0.43 0.48 

Canyonlands 1.50 1.02 0.90 1.14 1.50 

Capitol Reef 0.85 0.26 0.36 0.49 0.85 

Grand Canyon 0.39 0.26 0.19 0.28 0.39 

Great Sand Dunes 0.22 0.21 0.20 0.21 0.22 

La Garita 0.29 0.32 0.33 0.31 0.33 

Maroon Bells 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.19 0.20 

Mesa Verde 2.26 2.56 2.20 2.34 2.56 

Pecos 0.33 0.42 0.46 0.40 0.46 

Petrified Forest 0.26 0.18 0.16 0.20 0.26 

San Pedro 0.80 1.00 0.86 0.89 1.00 

West Elk 0.33 0.32 0.30 0.32 0.33 

Weminuche 0.45 0.59 0.52 0.52 0.59 

Wheeler Peak 0.27 0.28 0.31 0.29 0.31 

Overall 0.59 2.56 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 27 of 41 

Table 26 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 1 

Constant Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.86 0.67 0.71 0.75 0.86 

Bandelier 0.29 0.49 0.44 0.41 0.49 

Black Canyon 0.31 0.33 0.36 0.33 0.36 

Canyonlands 1.25 0.80 0.71 0.92 1.25 

Capitol Reef 0.66 0.20 0.28 0.38 0.66 

Grand Canyon 0.34 0.21 0.16 0.24 0.34 

Great Sand Dunes 0.16 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.16 

La Garita 0.22 0.22 0.24 0.23 0.24 

Maroon Bells 0.15 0.13 0.12 0.13 0.15 

Mesa Verde 1.96 2.23 1.77 1.99 2.23 

Pecos 0.25 0.32 0.34 0.30 0.34 

Petrified Forest 0.19 0.14 0.12 0.15 0.19 

San Pedro 0.57 0.75 0.65 0.66 0.75 

West Elk 0.25 0.22 0.25 0.24 0.25 

Weminuche 0.34 0.52 0.39 0.42 0.52 

Wheeler Peak 0.23 0.19 0.23 0.22 0.23 

Overall 0.47 2.23 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 28 of 41 

Table 27 

SNCR Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 1 

Constant Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.69 0.53 0.57 0.59 0.69 

Bandelier 0.23 0.39 0.35 0.33 0.39 

Black Canyon 0.25 0.26 0.29 0.27 0.29 

Canyonlands 0.99 0.63 0.58 0.73 0.99 

Capitol Reef 0.52 0.16 0.23 0.31 0.52 

Grand Canyon 0.27 0.17 0.13 0.19 0.27 

Great Sand Dunes 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 

La Garita 0.18 0.18 0.20 0.19 0.20 

Maroon Bells 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.11 0.12 

Mesa Verde 1.61 1.83 1.54 1.66 1.83 

Pecos 0.22 0.26 0.28 0.25 0.28 

Petrified Forest 0.17 0.11 0.11 0.13 0.17 

San Pedro 0.45 0.63 0.53 0.54 0.63 

West Elk 0.20 0.18 0.19 0.19 0.20 

Weminuche 0.27 0.41 0.32 0.33 0.41 

Wheeler Peak 0.19 0.15 0.18 0.17 0.19 

Overall 0.38 1.83 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 29 of 41 

Table 28

Unit 1 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visibility Modeling Resul

Constant Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) Improvement ($

(98th Percentile, see Note 1)

Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for 

each Class 1 Area) (see Note 4)

Class 1 Area

Pre-Consent 

Decree Consent Decree SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

Consent Decree

Consent Decree 

to SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to Consent 

Decree

Consent Decree 

SNCR

Arches 1.10 0.86 0.69 0.24 0.18 0.42 49,370,833 19,314,286 Bandelier 0.64 0.49 0.39 0.15 0.10 0.25 78,993,333 34,845,361 Black Canyon 0.48 0.36 0.29 0.12 0.07 0.19 98,741,667 51,212,121 Canyonlands 1.50 1.25 0.99 0.25 0.26 0.51 47,396,000 13,203,125 Capitol Reef 0.85 0.66 0.52 0.19 0.14 0.33 62,363,158 24,316,547 Grand Canyon 0.39 0.34 0.27 0.05 0.07 0.12 236,980,000 48,985,507 Great Sand Dunes 0.22 0.16 0.13 0.06 0.03 0.09 197,483,333 116,551,724 La Garita 0.33 0.24 0.20 0.09 0.05 0.14 131,655,556 75,111,111 Maroon Bells 0.20 0.15 0.12 0.05 0.04 0.09 236,980,000 96,571,429 Mesa Verde 2.56 2.23 1.83 0.33 0.41 0.74 35,906,061 8,345,679 Pecos 0.46 0.34 0.28 0.12 0.06 0.18 98,741,667 60,357,143 Petrified Forest 0.26 0.19 0.17 0.07 0.02 0.09 169,271,429 198,823,529 San Pedro 1.00 0.75 0.63 0.25 0.12 0.37 47,396,000 27,933,884 West Elk 0.33 0.25 0.20 0.08 0.05 0.13 148,112,500 62,592,593 Weminuche 0.59 0.52 0.41 0.07 0.11 0.18 169,271,429 30,727,273 Wheeler Peak 0.31 0.23 0.19 0.08 0.05 0.13 148,112,500 75,111,111 

Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data.2. NI = No Improvement3. NA = Not Applicable4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000):

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree $11,849

Consent Decree to SNCR $3,380Pre-Consent Decree to SNCR $15,229
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 30 of 41 

Table 29 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 2 

Constant Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.13 0.85 0.78 0.92 1.13 

Bandelier 0.38 0.65 0.65 0.56 0.65 

Black Canyon 0.41 0.44 0.49 0.45 0.49 

Canyonlands 1.53 1.03 0.91 1.16 1.53 

Capitol Reef 0.88 0.26 0.36 0.50 0.88 

Grand Canyon 0.39 0.26 0.19 0.28 0.39 

Great Sand Dunes 0.24 0.21 0.20 0.22 0.24 

La Garita 0.32 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 

Maroon Bells 0.19 0.18 0.20 0.19 0.20 

Mesa Verde 2.32 2.59 2.21 2.37 2.59 

Pecos 0.34 0.42 0.47 0.41 0.47 

Petrified Forest 0.27 0.18 0.16 0.20 0.27 

San Pedro 0.83 1.02 0.87 0.91 1.02 

West Elk 0.33 0.33 0.32 0.33 0.33 

Weminuche 0.46 0.59 0.53 0.53 0.59 

Wheeler Peak 0.27 0.29 0.30 0.29 0.30 

Overall 0.60 2.59 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 31 of 41 

Table 30 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 2 

Constant Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.85 0.67 0.71 0.74 0.85 

Bandelier 0.28 0.48 0.43 0.40 0.48 

Black Canyon 0.31 0.33 0.36 0.33 0.36 

Canyonlands 1.24 0.79 0.70 0.91 1.24 

Capitol Reef 0.66 0.20 0.28 0.38 0.66 

Grand Canyon 0.34 0.21 0.16 0.24 0.34 

Great Sand Dunes 0.16 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.16 

La Garita 0.22 0.22 0.24 0.23 0.24 

Maroon Bells 0.15 0.13 0.12 0.13 0.15 

Mesa Verde 1.95 2.22 1.76 1.98 2.22 

Pecos 0.25 0.31 0.34 0.30 0.34 

Petrified Forest 0.19 0.14 0.12 0.15 0.19 

San Pedro 0.57 0.75 0.65 0.66 0.75 

West Elk 0.25 0.22 0.24 0.24 0.25 

Weminuche 0.34 0.51 0.39 0.41 0.51 

Wheeler Peak 0.23 0.19 0.23 0.22 0.23 

Overall 0.47 2.22 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 32 of 41 

Table 31 

SNCR Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 2 

Constant Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.68 0.53 0.56 0.59 0.68 

Bandelier 0.23 0.39 0.35 0.32 0.39 

Black Canyon 0.25 0.26 0.29 0.27 0.29 

Canyonlands 0.99 0.63 0.57 0.73 0.99 

Capitol Reef 0.52 0.16 0.23 0.30 0.52 

Grand Canyon 0.27 0.17 0.13 0.19 0.27 

Great Sand Dunes 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 

La Garita 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.18 0.19 

Maroon Bells 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.11 0.12 

Mesa Verde 1.60 1.82 1.54 1.65 1.82 

Pecos 0.22 0.26 0.28 0.25 0.28 

Petrified Forest 0.17 0.11 0.11 0.13 0.17 

San Pedro 0.45 0.63 0.52 0.53 0.63 

West Elk 0.20 0.18 0.19 0.19 0.20 

Weminuche 0.27 0.41 0.32 0.33 0.41 

Wheeler Peak 0.18 0.15 0.18 0.17 0.18 

Overall 0.38 1.82 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 33 of 41 

Table 32

Unit 2 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visibility Modeling Resul

Constant Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) Improvement ($

(98th Percentile, see Note 1)

Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for 

each Class 1 Area) (see Note 4)

Class 1 Area

Pre-Consent 

Decree Consent Decree SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

Consent Decree

Consent Decree 

to SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to Consent 

Decree

Consent Decree 

SNCR

Arches 1.13 0.85 0.68 0.28 0.17 0.45 43,364,286 20,000,000 Bandelier 0.65 0.48 0.39 0.17 0.09 0.26 71,423,529 37,977,528 Black Canyon 0.49 0.36 0.29 0.13 0.07 0.20 93,400,000 49,705,882 Canyonlands 1.53 1.24 0.99 0.29 0.25 0.54 41,868,966 13,466,135 Capitol Reef 0.88 0.66 0.52 0.22 0.14 0.36 55,190,909 23,971,631 Grand Canyon 0.39 0.34 0.27 0.05 0.07 0.12 242,840,000 47,605,634 Great Sand Dunes 0.24 0.16 0.13 0.08 0.03 0.11 151,775,000 112,666,667 La Garita 0.33 0.24 0.19 0.09 0.05 0.14 134,911,111 73,478,261 Maroon Bells 0.20 0.15 0.12 0.05 0.04 0.09 242,840,000 96,571,429 Mesa Verde 2.59 2.22 1.82 0.37 0.40 0.77 32,816,216 8,366,337 Pecos 0.47 0.34 0.28 0.13 0.06 0.19 93,400,000 58,275,862 Petrified Forest 0.27 0.19 0.17 0.08 0.02 0.10 151,775,000 187,777,778 San Pedro 1.02 0.75 0.63 0.27 0.12 0.39 44,970,370 27,258,065 West Elk 0.33 0.25 0.20 0.08 0.06 0.14 151,775,000 61,454,545 Weminuche 0.59 0.51 0.41 0.08 0.10 0.18 151,775,000 33,137,255 Wheeler Peak 0.30 0.23 0.18 0.07 0.05 0.12 173,457,143 73,478,261 

Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data.2. NI = No Improvement3. NA = Not Applicable4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000):

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree $12,142

Consent Decree to SNCR $3,380Pre-Consent Decree to SNCR $15,522
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 34 of 41 

Table 33 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 3 

Constant Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.57 1.00 0.94 1.17 1.57 

Bandelier 0.60 0.97 1.01 0.86 1.01 

Black Canyon 0.68 0.63 0.76 0.69 0.76 

Canyonlands 2.01 1.21 1.26 1.49 2.01 

Capitol Reef 1.30 0.40 0.54 0.75 1.30 

Grand Canyon 0.55 0.40 0.31 0.42 0.55 

Great Sand Dunes 0.34 0.41 0.31 0.35 0.41 

La Garita 0.48 0.50 0.52 0.50 0.52 

Maroon Bells 0.28 0.27 0.31 0.29 0.31 

Mesa Verde 3.05 3.49 2.92 3.15 3.49 

Pecos 0.53 0.64 0.75 0.64 0.75 

Petrified Forest 0.45 0.27 0.24 0.32 0.45 

San Pedro 1.23 1.48 1.25 1.32 1.48 

West Elk 0.45 0.50 0.44 0.46 0.50 

Weminuche 0.71 1.03 0.81 0.85 1.03 

Wheeler Peak 0.44 0.45 0.42 0.44 0.45 

Overall 0.86 3.49 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 35 of 41 

Table 34 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 3 

Constant Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.33 0.88 0.84 1.02 1.33 

Bandelier 0.43 0.75 0.78 0.65 0.78 

Black Canyon 0.49 0.52 0.61 0.54 0.61 

Canyonlands 1.67 1.12 1.07 1.29 1.67 

Capitol Reef 0.99 0.28 0.42 0.56 0.99 

Grand Canyon 0.44 0.30 0.22 0.32 0.44 

Great Sand Dunes 0.27 0.26 0.23 0.25 0.27 

La Garita 0.35 0.35 0.38 0.36 0.38 

Maroon Bells 0.22 0.21 0.22 0.22 0.22 

Mesa Verde 2.42 2.86 2.41 2.56 2.86 

Pecos 0.39 0.48 0.55 0.47 0.55 

Petrified Forest 0.32 0.20 0.19 0.24 0.32 

San Pedro 0.95 1.14 1.02 1.04 1.14 

West Elk 0.36 0.39 0.39 0.38 0.39 

Weminuche 0.52 0.79 0.58 0.63 0.79 

Wheeler Peak 0.31 0.34 0.33 0.33 0.34 

Overall 0.68 2.86 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 36 of 41 

Table 35 

SNCR Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 3 

Constant Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.06 0.70 0.67 0.81 1.06 

Bandelier 0.36 0.62 0.63 0.54 0.63 

Black Canyon 0.39 0.41 0.49 0.43 0.49 

Canyonlands 1.34 0.89 0.85 1.03 1.34 

Capitol Reef 0.79 0.25 0.36 0.47 0.79 

Grand Canyon 0.35 0.25 0.19 0.26 0.35 

Great Sand Dunes 0.22 0.21 0.19 0.21 0.22 

La Garita 0.28 0.28 0.32 0.29 0.32 

Maroon Bells 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 

Mesa Verde 2.11 2.37 2.05 2.17 2.37 

Pecos 0.33 0.40 0.46 0.40 0.46 

Petrified Forest 0.28 0.17 0.16 0.20 0.28 

San Pedro 0.76 0.92 0.82 0.83 0.92 

West Elk 0.29 0.31 0.31 0.30 0.31 

Weminuche 0.43 0.62 0.52 0.52 0.62 

Wheeler Peak 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.29 

Overall 0.56 2.37 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 37 of 41 

Table 36

Unit 3 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visibility Modeling Resul

Constant Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) Improvement ($

(98th Percentile, see Note 1)

Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for 

each Class 1 Area) (see Note 4)

Class 1 Area

Pre-Consent 

Decree Consent Decree SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

Consent Decree

Consent Decree 

to SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to Consent 

Decree

Consent Decree 

SNCR

Arches 1.57 1.33 1.06 0.24 0.27 0.51 57,058,333 17,213,483 Bandelier 1.01 0.78 0.63 0.23 0.15 0.38 59,539,130 29,844,156 Black Canyon 0.76 0.61 0.49 0.15 0.12 0.27 91,293,333 38,300,000 Canyonlands 2.01 1.67 1.34 0.34 0.33 0.67 40,276,471 14,055,046 Capitol Reef 1.30 0.99 0.79 0.31 0.20 0.51 44,174,194 23,095,477 Grand Canyon 0.55 0.44 0.35 0.11 0.09 0.20 124,490,909 51,066,667 Great Sand Dunes 0.41 0.27 0.22 0.14 0.05 0.19 97,814,286 93,795,918 La Garita 0.52 0.38 0.32 0.14 0.06 0.20 97,814,286 74,129,032 Maroon Bells 0.31 0.22 0.17 0.09 0.05 0.14 152,155,556 99,913,043 Mesa Verde 3.49 2.86 2.37 0.63 0.50 1.13 21,736,508 9,284,848 Pecos 0.75 0.55 0.46 0.20 0.09 0.29 68,470,000 52,827,586 Petrified Forest 0.45 0.32 0.28 0.13 0.04 0.17 105,338,462 127,666,667 San Pedro 1.48 1.14 0.92 0.34 0.22 0.56 40,276,471 20,890,909 West Elk 0.50 0.39 0.31 0.11 0.08 0.19 124,490,909 59,688,312 Weminuche 1.03 0.79 0.62 0.24 0.17 0.41 57,058,333 27,686,747 Wheeler Peak 0.45 0.34 0.29 0.11 0.05 0.16 124,490,909 86,716,981 

Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data.2. NI = No Improvement3. NA = Not Applicable4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000):

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree $13,694

Consent Decree to SNCR $4,596Pre-Consent Decree to SNCR $18,290
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 38 of 41 

Table 37 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 4 

Constant Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.60 1.05 0.98 1.21 1.60 

Bandelier 0.60 0.98 1.02 0.87 1.02 

Black Canyon 0.67 0.64 0.77 0.69 0.77 

Canyonlands 2.00 1.22 1.28 1.50 2.00 

Capitol Reef 1.31 0.41 0.55 0.76 1.31 

Grand Canyon 0.56 0.41 0.31 0.43 0.56 

Great Sand Dunes 0.35 0.39 0.31 0.35 0.39 

La Garita 0.49 0.49 0.52 0.50 0.52 

Maroon Bells 0.28 0.27 0.28 0.28 0.28 

Mesa Verde 3.03 3.51 2.91 3.15 3.51 

Pecos 0.53 0.65 0.76 0.65 0.76 

Petrified Forest 0.45 0.27 0.25 0.32 0.45 

San Pedro 1.24 1.48 1.27 1.33 1.48 

West Elk 0.46 0.49 0.43 0.46 0.49 

Weminuche 0.70 1.03 0.81 0.85 1.03 

Wheeler Peak 0.45 0.46 0.42 0.44 0.46 

Overall 0.86 3.51 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 39 of 41 

Table 38 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 4 

Constant Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.31 0.88 0.82 1.00 1.31 

Bandelier 0.42 0.73 0.75 0.63 0.75 

Black Canyon 0.48 0.51 0.60 0.53 0.60 

Canyonlands 1.66 1.11 1.04 1.27 1.66 

Capitol Reef 0.99 0.27 0.41 0.56 0.99 

Grand Canyon 0.43 0.30 0.22 0.32 0.43 

Great Sand Dunes 0.27 0.26 0.23 0.25 0.27 

La Garita 0.35 0.35 0.37 0.36 0.37 

Maroon Bells 0.22 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.22 

Mesa Verde 2.39 2.82 2.34 2.52 2.82 

Pecos 0.38 0.47 0.54 0.46 0.54 

Petrified Forest 0.31 0.20 0.19 0.23 0.31 

San Pedro 0.94 1.11 1.00 1.02 1.11 

West Elk 0.36 0.38 0.36 0.37 0.38 

Weminuche 0.51 0.70 0.58 0.60 0.70 

Wheeler Peak 0.30 0.34 0.33 0.32 0.34 

Overall 0.67 2.82 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 40 of 41 

Table 39 

SNCR Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 4 

Constant Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.04 0.70 0.66 0.80 1.04 

Bandelier 0.35 0.60 0.60 0.52 0.60 

Black Canyon 0.39 0.40 0.48 0.42 0.48 

Canyonlands 1.33 0.89 0.83 1.02 1.33 

Capitol Reef 0.79 0.25 0.35 0.46 0.79 

Grand Canyon 0.35 0.25 0.19 0.26 0.35 

Great Sand Dunes 0.22 0.20 0.18 0.20 0.22 

La Garita 0.28 0.28 0.31 0.29 0.31 

Maroon Bells 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 

Mesa Verde 2.08 2.35 2.01 2.15 2.35 

Pecos 0.32 0.39 0.46 0.39 0.46 

Petrified Forest 0.31 0.17 0.19 0.22 0.31 

San Pedro 0.94 0.90 1.00 0.94 1.00 

West Elk 0.28 0.31 0.29 0.29 0.31 

Weminuche 0.42 0.56 0.51 0.50 0.56 

Wheeler Peak 0.28 0.28 0.27 0.28 0.28 

Overall 0.56 2.35 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 41 of 41 

Table 40

Unit 4 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visibility Modeling Resul

Constant Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) Improvement ($

(98th Percentile, see Note 1)

Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for 

each Class 1 Area) (see Note 4)

Class 1 Area

Pre-Consent 

Decree Consent Decree SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

Consent Decree

Consent Decree 

to SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to SNCR

Pre-Consent 

Decree to Consent 

Decree

Consent Decree 

SNCR

Arches 1.60 1.31 1.04 0.29 0.27 0.56 47,527,586 17,278,195 Bandelier 1.02 0.75 0.60 0.27 0.15 0.42 51,048,148 31,479,452 Black Canyon 0.77 0.60 0.48 0.17 0.12 0.29 81,076,471 39,620,690 Canyonlands 2.00 1.66 1.33 0.34 0.33 0.67 40,538,235 13,927,273 Capitol Reef 1.31 0.99 0.79 0.32 0.20 0.52 43,071,875 22,865,672 Grand Canyon 0.56 0.43 0.35 0.13 0.09 0.22 106,023,077 54,070,588 Great Sand Dunes 0.39 0.27 0.22 0.12 0.05 0.17 114,858,333 90,117,647 La Garita 0.52 0.37 0.31 0.15 0.06 0.21 91,886,667 72,952,381 Maroon Bells 0.28 0.22 0.17 0.06 0.05 0.11 229,716,667 93,795,918 Mesa Verde 3.51 2.82 2.35 0.69 0.47 1.16 19,975,362 9,841,542 Pecos 0.76 0.54 0.46 0.22 0.09 0.31 62,650,000 54,070,588 Petrified Forest 0.45 0.31 0.31 0.14 0.00 0.14 98,450,000 4,596,000,00San Pedro 1.48 1.11 1.00 0.37 0.11 0.48 37,251,351 40,315,789 West Elk 0.49 0.38 0.31 0.11 0.07 0.18 125,300,000 62,958,904 Weminuche 1.03 0.70 0.56 0.33 0.14 0.47 41,766,667 32,595,745 Wheeler Peak 0.46 0.34 0.28 0.12 0.06 0.18 114,858,333 79,241,379 

Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data.2. NI = No Improvement3. NA = Not Applicable4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000):

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree $13,783

Consent Decree to SNCR $4,596Pre-Consent Decree to SNCR $18,379
PNM SJGS BART Modeling

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree (4)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 59 1.92 71.14 23.07 1.46 0.89 1.08 2.36 100

BAND 70 1.31 35.48 59.51 1.32 0.81 0.83 2.06 100

BLCA 40 1.14 52.26 45.03 0.71 0.44 0.43 1.13 100

CANY 80 2.59 65.05 28.99 1.51 0.92 1.08 2.44 100

CARE 31 1.97 51.54 43.71 1.15 0.71 1.06 1.83 100

GRCA 14 1.14 42.20 54.25 0.90 0.55 0.65 1.45 100

GRSA 23 0.85 77.31 14.03 2.38 1.46 1.09 3.75 100

LAGA 35 1.15 42.48 54.54 0.77 0.47 0.50 1.24 100

MABE 16 0.67 41.50 54.30 1.08 0.66 0.76 1.70 100

MEVE 184 4.20 84.29 1.94 3.21 1.97 3.57 5.03 100

PECO 53 1.40 43.19 52.60 1.08 0.66 0.76 1.71 100

PEFO 18 1.13 84.94 9.80 1.30 0.79 1.11 2.06 100

SAPE 111 1.78 79.88 8.73 2.70 1.65 2.83 4.20 100

WEEL 34 0.99 40.76 54.57 1.20 0.73 0.85 1.89 100

WEMI 74 1.51 26.70 66.76 1.53 0.94 1.66 2.40 100

WHPE 37 1.00 32.06 63.10 1.28 0.78 0.76 2.02 100

Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 47 1.69 33.57 62.13 1.88 0.48 0.48 1.46 100

BAND 49 1.04 30.40 66.83 1.26 0.32 0.23 0.97 100

BLCA 26 0.95 37.13 57.66 2.28 0.58 0.58 1.76 100

CANY 67 2.26 55.66 38.57 2.53 0.65 0.62 1.98 100

CARE 28 1.81 52.95 42.68 1.91 0.49 0.48 1.49 100

GRCA 12 0.97 38.14 59.75 0.93 0.24 0.19 0.75 100

GRSA 14 0.63 38.82 54.18 3.18 0.81 0.53 2.47 100

LAGA 20 0.86 38.38 59.80 0.81 0.21 0.15 0.65 100

MABE 10 0.54 69.46 25.41 2.29 0.59 0.43 1.83 100

MEVE 157 3.38 75.39 9.84 6.26 1.60 2.09 4.82 100

PECO 35 1.05 80.51 15.41 1.83 0.47 0.36 1.43 100

PEFO 14 0.82 27.95 69.41 1.18 0.30 0.25 0.92 100

SAPE 93 1.40 39.89 53.93 2.71 0.69 0.68 2.09 100

WEEL 19 0.80 37.76 60.62 0.70 0.18 0.19 0.55 100

WEMI 53 1.15 28.74 65.59 2.44 0.62 0.72 1.88 100

WHPE 27 0.75 30.82 66.18 1.36 0.35 0.23 1.06 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 45 1.61 72.40 20.28 3.26 0.83 0.54 2.69 100

BAND 43 0.92 41.86 53.84 1.89 0.48 0.45 1.47 100

BLCA 20 0.84 53.16 42.04 2.12 0.54 0.45 1.69 100

CANY 63 2.15 73.09 23.31 1.59 0.41 0.34 1.26 100

CARE 27 1.64 58.97 36.17 2.13 0.54 0.53 1.66 100

GRCA 11 0.85 43.66 53.93 1.07 0.27 0.22 0.86 100

GRSA 10 0.58 81.57 12.19 2.87 0.73 0.39 2.24 100

LAGA 14 0.76 32.46 62.80 2.10 0.54 0.47 1.63 100

MABE 8 0.51 45.12 51.36 1.58 0.40 0.28 1.25 100

MEVE 153 3.36 76.09 9.01 6.32 1.61 2.11 4.87 100

PECO 30 0.90 48.12 48.79 1.38 0.35 0.27 1.08 100

PEFO 13 0.77 88.28 8.12 1.57 0.40 0.38 1.24 100

SAPE 85 1.31 76.57 16.80 2.87 0.73 0.83 2.21 100

WEEL 16 0.74 86.35 7.65 2.68 0.68 0.49 2.14 100

WEMI 44 1.03 90.40 1.92 3.41 0.87 0.73 2.66 100

WHPE 20 0.68 80.74 13.39 2.64 0.67 0.50 2.06 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree (4)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 46 1.76 43.87 46.41 2.37 1.45 2.20 3.70 100

BAND 87 1.86 44.28 49.89 1.45 0.89 1.18 2.31 100

BLCA 54 1.34 35.37 59.23 1.36 0.83 1.04 2.17 100

CANY 67 2.04 83.50 1.79 3.67 2.25 3.05 5.74 100

CARE 24 1.16 33.88 63.47 0.67 0.41 0.49 1.09 100

GRCA 15 0.93 89.85 2.03 2.09 1.28 1.45 3.30 100

GRSA 28 1.00 82.39 12.99 1.20 0.73 0.78 1.90 100

LAGA 63 1.30 81.37 13.32 1.40 0.86 0.81 2.24 100

MABE 20 0.78 28.96 63.27 2.15 1.32 0.80 3.49 100

MEVE 184 4.09 34.40 60.73 1.18 0.72 1.11 1.87 100

PECO 62 1.33 53.02 40.33 1.81 1.11 0.89 2.85 100

PEFO 16 0.79 90.95 1.94 1.81 1.11 1.31 2.89 100

SAPE 125 2.37 71.74 23.38 1.23 0.75 0.94 1.96 100

WEEL 43 1.15 35.15 60.78 1.03 0.63 0.76 1.65 100

WEMI 117 1.85 57.89 29.83 2.89 1.77 3.13 4.49 100

WHPE 40 0.95 55.69 38.20 1.67 1.02 0.74 2.67 100

Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 32 1.65 49.70 47.38 1.28 0.33 0.30 1.01 100

BAND 61 1.56 37.39 59.91 1.19 0.30 0.27 0.93 100

BLCA 30 1.15 31.11 65.99 1.28 0.33 0.28 1.02 100

CANY 57 1.73 52.51 43.96 1.55 0.40 0.35 1.23 100

CARE 18 0.82 91.30 1.66 3.11 0.79 0.69 2.46 100

GRCA 10 0.76 44.30 54.26 0.64 0.16 0.12 0.52 100

GRSA 17 0.71 28.48 69.87 0.74 0.19 0.13 0.60 100

LAGA 40 0.94 26.32 71.29 1.07 0.27 0.22 0.84 100

MABE 11 0.56 84.39 12.71 1.31 0.33 0.23 1.03 100

MEVE 162 3.53 85.08 5.44 4.14 1.06 1.04 3.24 100

PECO 41 1.09 41.87 56.64 0.66 0.17 0.13 0.53 100

PEFO 9 0.60 28.65 69.64 0.76 0.19 0.13 0.62 100

SAPE 109 2.01 46.15 47.36 2.82 0.72 0.76 2.19 100

WEEL 24 0.91 30.66 67.44 0.86 0.22 0.14 0.68 100

WEMI 83 1.48 57.20 35.77 3.02 0.77 0.91 2.32 100

WHPE 20 0.86 47.51 47.27 2.35 0.60 0.43 1.84 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 30 1.50 40.60 54.00 2.36 0.60 0.61 1.83 100

BAND 50 1.37 40.97 52.37 2.93 0.75 0.72 2.26 100

BLCA 27 1.00 39.08 58.62 1.04 0.27 0.17 0.82 100

CANY 50 1.61 44.41 50.77 2.07 0.53 0.61 1.60 100

CARE 13 0.72 39.07 58.93 0.88 0.22 0.18 0.71 100

GRCA 10 0.65 51.96 46.35 0.75 0.19 0.14 0.61 100

GRSA 10 0.62 34.26 61.88 1.73 0.44 0.32 1.36 100

LAGA 23 0.80 33.16 60.81 2.68 0.69 0.60 2.07 100

MABE 6 0.48 35.17 62.26 1.14 0.29 0.23 0.91 100

MEVE 157 3.22 78.22 10.20 4.95 1.26 1.53 3.83 100

PECO 35 0.94 49.33 48.91 0.78 0.20 0.15 0.62 100

PEFO 8 0.54 93.61 1.55 2.15 0.55 0.44 1.70 100

SAPE 97 1.80 40.29 54.47 2.29 0.58 0.58 1.79 100

WEEL 20 0.77 41.97 52.50 2.48 0.63 0.47 1.94 100

WEMI 62 1.35 39.83 58.09 0.91 0.23 0.23 0.71 100

WHPE 17 0.77 37.84 60.45 0.76 0.19 0.15 0.61 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree (4)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 39 1.82 38.16 50.64 2.67 1.63 2.75 4.15 100

BAND 77 1.51 40.84 49.83 2.33 1.43 1.94 3.63 100

BLCA 30 1.40 29.26 67.79 0.76 0.46 0.52 1.21 100

CANY 57 2.00 64.92 31.30 0.94 0.58 0.72 1.53 100

CARE 25 1.34 43.68 49.81 1.57 0.96 1.51 2.47 100

GRCA 11 0.81 91.83 0.94 1.83 1.12 1.34 2.94 100

GRSA 26 0.82 50.03 45.62 1.12 0.68 0.79 1.76 100

LAGA 40 1.14 25.27 67.60 2.02 1.24 0.66 3.22 100

MABE 15 0.63 36.60 57.88 1.53 0.94 0.65 2.41 100

MEVE 174 4.85 69.32 17.06 3.27 2.00 3.22 5.14 100

PECO 63 1.26 49.00 43.40 1.87 1.15 1.66 2.93 100

PEFO 17 0.74 88.02 6.36 1.46 0.90 0.89 2.36 100

SAPE 127 1.96 80.84 9.41 2.36 1.45 2.22 3.73 100

WEEL 31 0.94 25.57 71.56 0.70 0.43 0.61 1.12 100

WEMI 87 1.69 40.63 54.52 1.17 0.72 1.13 1.84 100

WHPE 48 1.05 48.42 48.68 0.78 0.48 0.39 1.25 100

Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 27 1.49 30.95 67.01 0.89 0.23 0.21 0.71 100

BAND 57 1.20 77.97 17.21 2.11 0.54 0.52 1.65 100

BLCA 21 1.07 27.98 70.17 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.65 100

CANY 48 1.68 70.45 24.81 2.07 0.53 0.49 1.65 100

CARE 23 1.05 52.60 45.24 0.94 0.24 0.20 0.77 100

GRCA 9 0.57 93.89 1.17 2.19 0.56 0.46 1.74 100

GRSA 15 0.64 27.42 70.94 0.76 0.19 0.09 0.60 100

LAGA 28 0.90 23.76 71.98 1.99 0.51 0.18 1.58 100

MABE 8 0.51 27.63 69.59 1.22 0.31 0.28 0.97 100

MEVE 159 3.80 41.19 53.18 2.41 0.62 0.72 1.88 100

PECO 50 1.00 51.25 46.75 0.89 0.23 0.18 0.70 100

PEFO 9 0.53 32.43 65.01 1.15 0.29 0.18 0.93 100

SAPE 97 1.56 37.04 56.49 2.78 0.71 0.83 2.15 100

WEEL 22 0.83 28.10 67.91 1.74 0.44 0.44 1.36 100

WEMI 63 1.34 36.23 61.45 1.00 0.26 0.29 0.77 100

WHPE 27 0.89 91.09 5.38 1.60 0.41 0.26 1.25 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 24 1.27 75.50 21.82 1.18 0.30 0.26 0.94 100

BAND 50 1.15 81.84 13.09 2.22 0.57 0.55 1.73 100

BLCA 18 0.97 45.30 50.29 1.92 0.49 0.49 1.51 100

CANY 44 1.61 73.72 21.32 2.17 0.55 0.51 1.73 100

CARE 22 1.00 48.93 48.71 1.03 0.26 0.24 0.82 100

GRCA 8 0.57 94.20 0.84 2.19 0.56 0.46 1.74 100

GRSA 11 0.52 55.69 41.08 1.44 0.37 0.30 1.13 100

LAGA 14 0.78 53.34 43.35 1.47 0.37 0.33 1.14 100

MABE 6 0.44 32.33 64.40 1.43 0.37 0.33 1.13 100

MEVE 156 3.58 82.03 0.93 7.25 1.85 2.36 5.58 100

PECO 41 0.91 73.33 23.52 1.42 0.36 0.24 1.12 100

PEFO 8 0.50 90.77 5.30 1.76 0.45 0.31 1.41 100

SAPE 90 1.48 84.06 9.18 2.93 0.75 0.79 2.29 100

WEEL 14 0.71 33.15 62.15 2.05 0.52 0.52 1.60 100

WEMI 56 1.16 36.56 60.24 1.42 0.36 0.29 1.12 100

WHPE 22 0.75 29.49 65.94 2.03 0.52 0.44 1.59 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 16 0.82 25.92 68.87 1.30 0.79 1.06 2.06 100

BAND 1 0.31 41.96 53.16 1.24 0.75 0.94 1.95 100

BLCA 2 0.35 31.77 66.43 0.47 0.29 0.29 0.75 100

CANY 28 1.10 43.62 52.48 0.91 0.55 1.03 1.41 100

CARE 12 0.76 26.38 71.01 0.64 0.38 0.58 1.01 100

GRCA 5 0.31 31.06 66.09 0.72 0.44 0.52 1.17 100

GRSA 0 0.18 87.77 6.73 1.38 0.83 1.12 2.17 100

LAGA 1 0.26 36.35 60.88 0.72 0.44 0.46 1.16 100

MABE 0 0.18 23.69 72.07 1.08 0.65 0.82 1.69 100

MEVE 55 1.51 47.09 35.97 3.88 2.35 4.67 6.04 100

PECO 2 0.29 24.39 68.71 1.72 1.04 1.48 2.67 100

PEFO 2 0.25 84.76 11.37 0.99 0.60 0.69 1.59 100

SAPE 10 0.61 26.56 68.07 1.32 0.80 1.20 2.05 100

WEEL 2 0.27 31.55 66.50 0.52 0.31 0.29 0.82 100

WEMI 3 0.37 22.71 69.34 1.89 1.14 1.99 2.93 100

WHPE 2 0.24 27.68 69.49 0.76 0.46 0.42 1.20 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.69 25.34 71.69 1.31 0.33 0.31 1.03 100

BAND 1 0.24 43.57 53.42 1.34 0.34 0.29 1.04 100

BLCA 2 0.29 23.45 74.26 0.99 0.25 0.26 0.78 100

CANY 22 1.00 38.19 59.52 1.01 0.26 0.23 0.80 100

CARE 11 0.57 26.93 71.52 0.67 0.17 0.17 0.53 100

GRCA 4 0.27 30.85 67.43 0.76 0.19 0.15 0.61 100

GRSA 0 0.14 21.45 76.75 0.80 0.20 0.17 0.63 100

LAGA 0 0.19 28.88 69.14 0.89 0.23 0.16 0.70 100

MABE 0 0.14 20.45 75.64 1.73 0.44 0.40 1.34 100

MEVE 38 1.35 35.69 59.62 2.00 0.51 0.63 1.55 100

PECO 1 0.23 25.62 70.23 1.82 0.47 0.44 1.41 100

PEFO 2 0.19 25.42 72.19 1.06 0.27 0.23 0.84 100

SAPE 7 0.44 27.36 69.47 1.39 0.36 0.35 1.08 100

WEEL 0 0.22 33.65 63.73 1.17 0.30 0.22 0.93 100

WEMI 2 0.31 30.63 61.38 3.48 0.89 0.91 2.70 100

WHPE 2 0.19 28.38 69.83 0.81 0.21 0.13 0.64 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 12 0.58 30.49 65.93 1.57 0.40 0.37 1.24 100

BAND 1 0.20 31.68 64.38 1.80 0.46 0.29 1.40 100

BLCA 1 0.23 29.45 67.68 1.25 0.32 0.33 0.98 100

CANY 20 0.87 42.24 55.66 0.93 0.24 0.20 0.74 100

CARE 7 0.46 33.38 64.70 0.83 0.21 0.21 0.66 100

GRCA 2 0.22 37.68 60.22 0.93 0.24 0.19 0.75 100

GRSA 0 0.12 80.37 13.49 2.82 0.72 0.39 2.21 100

LAGA 0 0.16 32.01 63.24 2.11 0.54 0.47 1.64 100

MABE 0 0.11 25.74 69.34 2.18 0.56 0.50 1.69 100

MEVE 31 1.19 33.44 64.17 1.02 0.26 0.32 0.79 100

PECO 0 0.19 33.00 64.36 1.19 0.30 0.22 0.93 100

PEFO 1 0.17 33.24 64.57 0.95 0.24 0.26 0.74 100

SAPE 6 0.36 33.46 62.66 1.70 0.44 0.42 1.32 100

WEEL 0 0.18 40.97 55.84 1.43 0.36 0.27 1.13 100

WEMI 2 0.25 30.21 64.02 2.49 0.64 0.72 1.93 100

WHPE 1 0.16 44.25 53.24 1.14 0.29 0.19 0.89 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 11 0.68 24.06 72.39 0.91 0.55 0.63 1.46 100

BAND 7 0.49 50.26 40.84 2.33 1.41 1.50 3.66 100

BLCA 4 0.37 19.24 76.63 0.99 0.60 0.99 1.55 100

CANY 16 0.84 30.14 66.46 0.85 0.51 0.67 1.36 100

CARE 4 0.23 29.36 68.45 0.54 0.33 0.45 0.87 100

GRCA 1 0.21 42.87 54.86 0.58 0.35 0.37 0.97 100

GRSA 0 0.20 27.46 69.95 0.68 0.41 0.39 1.10 100

LAGA 0 0.28 23.68 72.69 0.93 0.56 0.66 1.48 100

MABE 0 0.16 27.20 65.28 2.09 1.27 0.76 3.40 100

MEVE 73 1.79 37.50 56.98 1.29 0.78 1.40 2.05 100

PECO 3 0.31 38.08 53.60 2.22 1.34 1.25 3.51 100

PEFO 2 0.16 28.11 69.15 0.71 0.43 0.44 1.17 100

SAPE 27 0.73 26.46 67.64 1.45 0.88 1.29 2.29 100

WEEL 1 0.28 23.98 70.42 1.36 0.82 1.31 2.11 100

WEMI 9 0.54 43.96 46.81 2.18 1.32 2.34 3.39 100

WHPE 0 0.25 30.07 67.71 0.57 0.35 0.39 0.92 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.54 23.97 72.89 1.37 0.35 0.35 1.07 100

BAND 4 0.40 31.04 66.80 0.95 0.24 0.22 0.75 100

BLCA 1 0.29 25.16 72.63 0.98 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

CANY 13 0.65 23.43 73.82 1.20 0.31 0.31 0.94 100

CARE 3 0.18 31.45 66.94 0.71 0.18 0.15 0.57 100

GRCA 1 0.16 43.73 54.87 0.62 0.16 0.11 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.14 27.52 70.87 0.72 0.19 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 0 0.21 25.77 71.45 1.20 0.31 0.33 0.94 100

MABE 0 0.12 26.89 71.16 0.87 0.22 0.16 0.69 100

MEVE 52 1.40 60.18 31.05 3.70 0.95 1.26 2.86 100

PECO 3 0.24 40.91 57.63 0.65 0.17 0.13 0.52 100

PEFO 0 0.13 28.41 69.90 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.62 100

SAPE 16 0.59 26.83 69.85 1.45 0.37 0.35 1.14 100

WEEL 0 0.20 24.64 72.13 1.40 0.36 0.38 1.09 100

WEMI 6 0.43 24.32 73.64 0.90 0.23 0.19 0.72 100

WHPE 0 0.17 31.55 67.09 0.60 0.15 0.12 0.49 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 5 0.44 29.61 66.50 1.70 0.43 0.43 1.32 100

BAND 4 0.33 37.84 59.53 1.15 0.30 0.27 0.91 100

BLCA 0 0.23 31.64 65.58 1.23 0.31 0.25 0.98 100

CANY 9 0.53 29.21 67.36 1.49 0.38 0.39 1.17 100

CARE 1 0.15 38.51 59.52 0.86 0.22 0.18 0.70 100

GRCA 0 0.14 51.64 46.71 0.73 0.19 0.13 0.60 100

GRSA 0 0.13 34.43 61.81 1.69 0.43 0.31 1.33 100

LAGA 0 0.17 31.97 64.58 1.49 0.38 0.41 1.16 100

MABE 0 0.10 34.91 59.18 2.72 0.70 0.28 2.21 100

MEVE 45 1.24 57.38 30.54 5.12 1.31 1.69 3.95 100

PECO 1 0.21 49.72 46.50 1.68 0.43 0.35 1.33 100

PEFO 0 0.11 34.26 63.03 1.21 0.31 0.19 1.00 100

SAPE 7 0.48 33.05 62.86 1.79 0.46 0.44 1.41 100

WEEL 0 0.16 30.57 65.44 1.74 0.45 0.47 1.35 100

WEMI 1 0.36 52.83 41.13 2.59 0.66 0.78 2.01 100

WHPE 0 0.14 38.69 59.63 0.74 0.19 0.15 0.60 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.60 28.75 65.62 1.35 0.81 1.33 2.14 100

BAND 8 0.54 22.07 72.47 1.34 0.81 1.23 2.09 100

BLCA 2 0.38 34.19 62.97 0.72 0.43 0.54 1.15 100

CANY 14 0.71 29.97 59.10 2.54 1.54 2.91 3.94 100

CARE 3 0.32 86.40 1.13 3.02 1.83 2.88 4.74 100

GRCA 0 0.16 51.56 42.85 1.42 0.86 1.00 2.30 100

GRSA 1 0.17 19.79 77.41 0.69 0.42 0.59 1.10 100

LAGA 2 0.29 36.29 60.25 0.89 0.54 0.59 1.44 100

MABE 0 0.16 31.87 65.36 0.70 0.42 0.53 1.12 100

MEVE 60 1.67 38.31 45.74 3.66 2.22 4.38 5.69 100

PECO 3 0.35 51.53 42.28 1.61 0.98 1.01 2.59 100

PEFO 0 0.14 31.20 64.81 1.05 0.64 0.58 1.73 100

SAPE 13 0.63 34.16 60.15 1.34 0.81 1.43 2.10 100

WEEL 0 0.25 23.83 70.37 1.42 0.86 1.27 2.25 100

WEMI 4 0.45 21.90 69.56 2.19 1.33 1.52 3.49 100

WHPE 1 0.26 22.07 72.11 1.47 0.89 1.11 2.34 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.52 29.53 67.07 1.47 0.38 0.40 1.16 100

BAND 3 0.37 23.82 72.96 1.41 0.36 0.36 1.10 100

BLCA 0 0.28 25.40 72.77 0.80 0.20 0.19 0.64 100

CANY 12 0.57 38.31 60.22 0.65 0.17 0.14 0.52 100

CARE 2 0.23 31.26 65.22 1.53 0.39 0.39 1.20 100

GRCA 0 0.12 52.37 44.18 1.52 0.39 0.31 1.22 100

GRSA 1 0.14 27.01 70.46 1.12 0.29 0.22 0.89 100

LAGA 0 0.21 20.74 75.52 1.71 0.44 0.17 1.41 100

MABE 0 0.11 33.14 63.55 1.53 0.39 0.19 1.20 100

MEVE 48 1.27 41.93 48.61 4.01 1.03 1.33 3.10 100

PECO 1 0.27 46.70 51.27 0.91 0.23 0.15 0.73 100

PEFO 0 0.11 31.59 65.92 1.12 0.29 0.18 0.91 100

SAPE 7 0.50 26.74 68.42 2.08 0.53 0.62 1.61 100

WEEL 0 0.20 20.88 76.49 1.15 0.30 0.29 0.90 100

WEMI 3 0.35 45.71 42.80 4.96 1.27 1.43 3.84 100

WHPE 0 0.20 22.74 73.74 1.56 0.40 0.34 1.23 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 6 0.45 58.05 39.91 0.90 0.23 0.19 0.72 100

BAND 1 0.30 29.57 66.43 1.75 0.45 0.44 1.36 100

BLCA 0 0.23 31.76 65.95 1.00 0.26 0.23 0.80 100

CANY 7 0.49 57.57 40.40 0.89 0.23 0.19 0.72 100

CARE 2 0.21 94.25 1.16 2.01 0.51 0.47 1.60 100

GRCA 0 0.12 94.04 1.01 2.19 0.56 0.45 1.75 100

GRSA 0 0.12 33.39 63.49 1.39 0.36 0.27 1.11 100

LAGA 0 0.17 42.31 54.78 1.28 0.33 0.31 1.00 100

MABE 0 0.09 40.33 55.64 1.86 0.48 0.23 1.46 100

MEVE 43 1.13 47.22 42.12 4.52 1.16 1.50 3.49 100

PECO 1 0.23 60.82 34.74 1.99 0.51 0.36 1.59 100

PEFO 0 0.10 90.57 5.52 1.74 0.45 0.32 1.40 100

SAPE 5 0.43 32.86 61.98 2.22 0.57 0.65 1.72 100

WEEL 0 0.17 43.51 54.53 0.86 0.22 0.20 0.69 100

WEMI 2 0.30 30.17 62.47 3.19 0.82 0.87 2.48 100

WHPE 0 0.18 42.56 55.63 0.80 0.20 0.17 0.64 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 16 0.83 25.00 69.90 1.28 0.78 1.04 2.02 100

BAND 1 0.32 25.12 71.09 1.01 0.61 0.61 1.57 100

BLCA 3 0.36 23.37 71.60 1.28 0.78 0.99 1.98 100

CANY 27 1.07 40.57 55.69 0.86 0.53 1.00 1.35 100

CARE 12 0.78 25.24 72.22 0.62 0.38 0.56 0.99 100

GRCA 5 0.31 29.84 67.36 0.71 0.43 0.51 1.15 100

GRSA 0 0.19 32.82 57.23 2.66 1.62 1.52 4.16 100

LAGA 0 0.26 34.98 62.29 0.71 0.43 0.46 1.14 100

MABE 0 0.18 19.11 76.53 1.10 0.67 0.86 1.73 100

MEVE 56 1.49 45.92 37.44 3.81 2.32 4.60 5.92 100

PECO 2 0.29 84.16 9.33 1.63 0.99 1.33 2.56 100

PEFO 2 0.25 23.63 72.55 0.97 0.59 0.72 1.54 100

SAPE 11 0.63 25.41 69.31 1.29 0.79 1.19 2.01 100

WEEL 1 0.27 30.10 67.99 0.51 0.31 0.29 0.80 100

WEMI 3 0.38 31.78 59.74 2.05 1.25 1.98 3.19 100

WHPE 2 0.24 26.23 70.99 0.74 0.45 0.42 1.17 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.69 25.31 71.71 1.31 0.34 0.31 1.02 100

BAND 1 0.23 43.57 53.42 1.34 0.34 0.29 1.03 100

BLCA 2 0.28 23.45 74.26 1.00 0.26 0.26 0.77 100

CANY 22 0.99 38.13 59.58 1.01 0.26 0.23 0.80 100

CARE 10 0.57 26.92 71.52 0.68 0.17 0.17 0.53 100

GRCA 4 0.27 30.84 67.43 0.76 0.20 0.15 0.61 100

GRSA 0 0.14 21.45 76.75 0.80 0.21 0.17 0.62 100

LAGA 0 0.19 28.87 69.14 0.89 0.23 0.16 0.70 100

MABE 0 0.14 20.45 75.64 1.74 0.44 0.40 1.33 100

MEVE 38 1.35 35.54 59.78 2.00 0.51 0.63 1.53 100

PECO 1 0.23 25.62 70.23 1.83 0.47 0.44 1.40 100

PEFO 2 0.19 25.42 72.18 1.07 0.27 0.23 0.83 100

SAPE 7 0.44 27.35 69.47 1.40 0.36 0.35 1.07 100

WEEL 0 0.22 33.65 63.72 1.18 0.30 0.22 0.92 100

WEMI 2 0.31 30.63 61.38 3.50 0.90 0.91 2.69 100

WHPE 2 0.18 28.38 69.83 0.82 0.21 0.13 0.64 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 12 0.57 30.47 65.95 1.58 0.40 0.37 1.23 100

BAND 1 0.20 31.69 64.37 1.81 0.46 0.29 1.39 100

BLCA 1 0.23 29.45 67.67 1.25 0.32 0.33 0.97 100

CANY 20 0.87 42.22 55.67 0.93 0.24 0.20 0.74 100

CARE 7 0.46 33.38 64.70 0.84 0.21 0.21 0.66 100

GRCA 2 0.22 37.68 60.22 0.93 0.24 0.19 0.75 100

GRSA 0 0.12 42.29 50.10 3.47 0.89 0.57 2.68 100

LAGA 0 0.16 32.01 63.23 2.12 0.54 0.47 1.63 100

MABE 0 0.11 25.74 69.33 2.19 0.56 0.50 1.68 100

MEVE 31 1.19 33.43 64.17 1.02 0.26 0.32 0.79 100

PECO 0 0.19 33.00 64.36 1.19 0.31 0.22 0.93 100

PEFO 1 0.17 33.24 64.56 0.95 0.24 0.26 0.74 100

SAPE 6 0.36 33.45 62.66 1.71 0.44 0.42 1.31 100

WEEL 0 0.18 40.97 55.84 1.43 0.37 0.27 1.12 100

WEMI 2 0.25 30.20 64.01 2.50 0.64 0.73 1.92 100

WHPE 1 0.16 44.25 53.24 1.14 0.29 0.19 0.89 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 11 0.64 26.15 67.85 1.45 0.89 1.39 2.27 100

BAND 7 0.50 48.55 42.63 2.30 1.40 1.49 3.62 100

BLCA 4 0.37 18.38 77.59 0.97 0.59 0.97 1.51 100

CANY 15 0.83 28.77 67.90 0.83 0.51 0.66 1.33 100

CARE 4 0.23 27.98 69.89 0.53 0.32 0.44 0.85 100

GRCA 1 0.20 40.86 56.90 0.57 0.35 0.37 0.95 100

GRSA 0 0.21 26.11 71.35 0.67 0.41 0.39 1.08 100

LAGA 0 0.29 22.65 73.82 0.90 0.55 0.64 1.44 100

MABE 0 0.16 26.26 66.39 2.05 1.25 0.74 3.32 100

MEVE 72 1.82 36.41 58.08 1.29 0.79 1.39 2.04 100

PECO 3 0.31 36.65 55.19 2.17 1.32 1.23 3.43 100

PEFO 2 0.16 26.72 70.61 0.69 0.42 0.43 1.13 100

SAPE 28 0.73 25.48 68.66 1.43 0.87 1.28 2.26 100

WEEL 1 0.29 22.95 71.57 1.32 0.81 1.29 2.06 100

WEMI 9 0.56 18.60 76.08 1.26 0.77 1.32 1.97 100

WHPE 0 0.26 28.49 69.36 0.55 0.33 0.38 0.89 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.54 23.96 72.89 1.38 0.35 0.35 1.07 100

BAND 4 0.40 31.03 66.81 0.95 0.24 0.22 0.74 100

BLCA 1 0.29 25.16 72.63 0.98 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

CANY 13 0.65 23.42 73.82 1.20 0.31 0.31 0.93 100

CARE 3 0.18 31.45 66.94 0.71 0.18 0.15 0.57 100

GRCA 1 0.16 43.73 54.87 0.62 0.16 0.11 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.14 27.52 70.87 0.73 0.19 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 0 0.21 25.77 71.45 1.21 0.31 0.33 0.93 100

MABE 0 0.11 26.89 71.16 0.88 0.22 0.16 0.69 100

MEVE 52 1.40 60.02 31.23 3.71 0.95 1.25 2.84 100

PECO 3 0.24 40.91 57.63 0.65 0.17 0.13 0.52 100

PEFO 0 0.13 28.41 69.90 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.61 100

SAPE 16 0.58 26.82 69.85 1.46 0.37 0.35 1.14 100

WEEL 0 0.20 24.64 72.13 1.41 0.36 0.38 1.08 100

WEMI 6 0.42 24.31 73.65 0.91 0.23 0.19 0.72 100

WHPE 0 0.17 31.55 67.09 0.61 0.16 0.12 0.48 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 5 0.44 29.61 66.50 1.70 0.44 0.43 1.32 100

BAND 4 0.33 37.84 59.53 1.16 0.30 0.27 0.91 100

BLCA 0 0.23 31.64 65.58 1.23 0.32 0.25 0.98 100

CANY 9 0.52 29.20 67.36 1.50 0.38 0.39 1.17 100

CARE 1 0.15 36.80 61.56 0.72 0.18 0.17 0.57 100

GRCA 0 0.14 51.64 46.70 0.73 0.19 0.13 0.60 100

GRSA 0 0.13 34.43 61.80 1.70 0.43 0.31 1.32 100

LAGA 0 0.17 31.97 64.58 1.50 0.38 0.41 1.15 100

MABE 0 0.10 34.91 59.18 2.74 0.70 0.28 2.19 100

MEVE 44 1.24 57.35 30.56 5.14 1.32 1.70 3.93 100

PECO 1 0.21 49.71 46.50 1.68 0.43 0.35 1.32 100

PEFO 0 0.11 34.26 63.03 1.22 0.31 0.19 0.99 100

SAPE 7 0.48 33.05 62.86 1.80 0.46 0.44 1.40 100

WEEL 0 0.16 30.56 65.43 1.75 0.45 0.47 1.34 100

WEMI 1 0.36 52.82 41.13 2.61 0.67 0.78 1.99 100

WHPE 0 0.14 38.69 59.63 0.75 0.19 0.15 0.59 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.58 26.09 65.91 1.91 1.16 1.95 2.97 100

BAND 8 0.54 21.18 73.48 1.31 0.80 1.19 2.04 100

BLCA 3 0.39 31.74 65.45 0.70 0.43 0.55 1.12 100

CANY 13 0.72 29.11 60.16 2.49 1.52 2.85 3.87 100

CARE 3 0.31 86.04 1.21 3.09 1.88 2.94 4.84 100

GRCA 0 0.16 49.96 44.45 1.42 0.86 1.00 2.29 100

GRSA 1 0.17 25.45 72.07 0.69 0.42 0.28 1.09 100

LAGA 1 0.29 19.38 74.87 1.61 0.98 0.49 2.66 100

MABE 0 0.16 31.67 65.36 0.73 0.45 0.63 1.16 100

MEVE 60 1.66 38.26 45.78 3.66 2.23 4.39 5.68 100

PECO 3 0.36 20.30 74.98 1.21 0.74 0.82 1.96 100

PEFO 0 0.14 69.40 24.51 1.58 0.96 0.97 2.58 100

SAPE 13 0.64 24.73 67.13 1.92 1.17 2.07 2.99 100

WEEL 0 0.26 22.86 71.46 1.39 0.85 1.25 2.20 100

WEMI 4 0.44 37.67 57.85 1.06 0.65 1.12 1.65 100

WHPE 1 0.26 32.19 65.39 0.61 0.37 0.45 0.98 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.52 29.52 67.08 1.47 0.38 0.40 1.15 100

BAND 3 0.37 23.81 72.96 1.42 0.36 0.36 1.09 100

BLCA 0 0.28 25.40 72.77 0.80 0.21 0.19 0.64 100

CANY 12 0.57 38.31 60.22 0.65 0.17 0.14 0.52 100

CARE 2 0.23 31.25 65.23 1.54 0.39 0.39 1.20 100

GRCA 0 0.12 52.36 44.18 1.53 0.39 0.31 1.22 100

GRSA 1 0.14 27.01 70.46 1.13 0.29 0.22 0.89 100

LAGA 0 0.21 20.74 75.52 1.72 0.44 0.17 1.40 100

MABE 0 0.11 33.14 63.55 1.54 0.39 0.19 1.19 100

MEVE 48 1.26 41.89 48.65 4.03 1.03 1.33 3.08 100

PECO 1 0.27 46.68 51.28 0.92 0.24 0.15 0.73 100

PEFO 0 0.11 72.61 23.59 1.70 0.44 0.30 1.37 100

SAPE 7 0.50 26.73 68.43 2.09 0.53 0.62 1.60 100

WEEL 0 0.20 20.87 76.49 1.16 0.30 0.29 0.89 100

WEMI 3 0.35 45.70 42.79 4.98 1.28 1.43 3.82 100

WHPE 0 0.20 22.74 73.73 1.56 0.40 0.34 1.22 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 6 0.44 58.04 39.92 0.90 0.23 0.19 0.72 100

BAND 1 0.30 29.57 66.43 1.76 0.45 0.44 1.35 100

BLCA 0 0.22 31.76 65.95 1.01 0.26 0.23 0.79 100

CANY 6 0.48 57.56 40.42 0.90 0.23 0.19 0.72 100

CARE 2 0.21 94.24 1.16 2.02 0.52 0.47 1.59 100

GRCA 0 0.12 94.04 1.01 2.20 0.56 0.45 1.74 100

GRSA 0 0.12 33.39 63.49 1.39 0.36 0.27 1.10 100

LAGA 0 0.17 42.31 54.78 1.28 0.33 0.31 0.99 100

MABE 0 0.09 40.34 55.63 1.87 0.48 0.23 1.45 100

MEVE 43 1.13 47.19 42.16 4.53 1.16 1.50 3.47 100

PECO 1 0.23 60.82 34.73 2.00 0.51 0.36 1.58 100

PEFO 0 0.10 90.57 5.52 1.75 0.45 0.32 1.39 100

SAPE 5 0.43 32.82 62.02 2.23 0.57 0.65 1.71 100

WEEL 0 0.17 43.51 54.53 0.86 0.22 0.20 0.68 100

WEMI 2 0.30 30.17 62.46 3.20 0.82 0.88 2.47 100

WHPE 0 0.17 42.56 55.63 0.80 0.21 0.17 0.64 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 1.04 37.90 59.89 0.56 0.35 0.41 0.89 100

BAND 9 0.53 76.32 16.85 1.73 1.07 1.30 2.73 100

BLCA 10 0.58 27.65 66.71 1.42 0.87 1.14 2.21 100

CANY 35 1.44 35.63 61.86 0.63 0.39 0.48 1.02 100

CARE 17 1.10 29.96 67.35 0.65 0.40 0.61 1.03 100

GRCA 7 0.48 30.18 67.22 0.65 0.40 0.53 1.03 100

GRSA 1 0.28 76.24 15.49 2.27 1.39 1.03 3.58 100

LAGA 4 0.40 39.72 57.57 0.70 0.43 0.45 1.13 100

MABE 1 0.24 35.97 61.92 0.56 0.35 0.32 0.89 100

MEVE 100 1.92 53.68 38.69 1.83 1.12 1.82 2.86 100

PECO 6 0.48 51.34 44.27 1.13 0.69 0.80 1.77 100

PEFO 5 0.43 86.46 10.06 0.89 0.55 0.62 1.42 100

SAPE 31 0.88 30.39 63.58 1.46 0.90 1.41 2.26 100

WEEL 6 0.38 37.70 56.66 1.47 0.91 0.92 2.33 100

WEMI 9 0.59 26.83 67.21 1.46 0.90 1.33 2.28 100

WHPE 5 0.37 29.53 67.67 0.74 0.45 0.44 1.17 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 0.89 35.30 62.84 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.66 100

BAND 3 0.39 26.98 70.54 1.12 0.28 0.21 0.87 100

BLCA 4 0.44 25.68 71.04 1.46 0.37 0.33 1.12 100

CANY 29 1.15 32.46 66.00 0.68 0.17 0.15 0.54 100

CARE 14 0.86 26.87 71.56 0.68 0.17 0.18 0.54 100

GRCA 5 0.35 27.44 70.95 0.71 0.18 0.17 0.56 100

GRSA 0 0.21 36.16 57.33 2.97 0.75 0.50 2.30 100

LAGA 1 0.29 25.67 70.62 1.64 0.42 0.37 1.27 100

MABE 0 0.20 33.23 64.11 1.21 0.30 0.21 0.95 100

MEVE 64 1.56 52.43 37.30 4.36 1.10 1.46 3.35 100

PECO 3 0.35 87.02 9.06 1.73 0.44 0.41 1.34 100

PEFO 2 0.29 85.92 11.67 1.07 0.27 0.21 0.85 100

SAPE 18 0.70 27.84 68.80 1.47 0.37 0.39 1.13 100

WEEL 4 0.30 34.05 62.90 1.38 0.35 0.24 1.08 100

WEMI 6 0.44 21.26 75.66 1.32 0.33 0.40 1.03 100

WHPE 2 0.28 27.58 70.65 0.80 0.20 0.14 0.63 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 17 0.79 40.17 57.68 0.95 0.24 0.20 0.76 100

BAND 1 0.32 30.96 65.01 1.85 0.47 0.30 1.42 100

BLCA 3 0.36 31.46 64.52 1.79 0.45 0.41 1.37 100

CANY 27 1.01 49.69 47.77 1.08 0.27 0.35 0.83 100

CARE 12 0.71 33.00 65.07 0.84 0.21 0.22 0.66 100

GRCA 4 0.28 38.94 58.92 0.95 0.24 0.20 0.76 100

GRSA 0 0.18 80.39 13.47 2.83 0.71 0.39 2.21 100

LAGA 0 0.26 82.76 12.56 2.07 0.52 0.47 1.61 100

MABE 0 0.16 40.46 56.29 1.47 0.37 0.26 1.15 100

MEVE 57 1.50 75.56 6.27 7.69 1.94 2.65 5.89 100

PECO 2 0.29 37.38 59.81 1.31 0.33 0.16 1.02 100

PEFO 2 0.27 33.14 64.66 0.95 0.24 0.27 0.73 100

SAPE 10 0.59 33.16 62.84 1.75 0.44 0.47 1.34 100

WEEL 1 0.25 41.35 54.94 1.68 0.42 0.29 1.31 100

WEMI 2 0.36 31.69 63.95 1.91 0.48 0.50 1.47 100

WHPE 2 0.22 64.07 31.10 2.15 0.54 0.46 1.67 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 15 0.81 31.17 63.37 1.30 0.80 1.33 2.03 100

BAND 20 0.81 28.33 63.99 1.89 1.16 1.69 2.94 100

BLCA 9 0.53 21.84 73.75 1.06 0.65 1.04 1.65 100

CANY 22 1.04 23.62 71.52 1.13 0.70 1.26 1.76 100

CARE 5 0.38 34.41 62.98 0.66 0.40 0.48 1.07 100

GRCA 3 0.33 45.95 51.86 0.55 0.34 0.36 0.92 100

GRSA 3 0.33 82.46 13.08 1.16 0.71 0.76 1.83 100

LAGA 5 0.44 25.09 67.37 1.91 1.17 1.50 2.97 100

MABE 0 0.25 28.79 63.57 2.12 1.30 0.81 3.42 100

MEVE 95 2.18 50.54 42.30 1.67 1.03 1.84 2.63 100

PECO 8 0.52 43.31 54.53 0.56 0.34 0.37 0.89 100

PEFO 5 0.25 91.13 1.98 1.75 1.08 1.27 2.80 100

SAPE 43 1.03 34.16 58.88 1.69 1.04 1.59 2.64 100

WEEL 5 0.42 34.33 58.68 1.81 1.11 1.22 2.86 100

WEMI 23 0.82 31.35 66.25 0.58 0.36 0.54 0.92 100

WHPE 3 0.39 33.90 60.27 1.53 0.94 0.95 2.41 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 12 0.65 29.26 66.96 1.65 0.42 0.45 1.27 100

BAND 10 0.57 52.51 41.86 2.54 0.64 0.47 1.97 100

BLCA 5 0.41 28.10 70.16 0.78 0.20 0.14 0.62 100

CANY 17 0.85 30.97 66.94 0.92 0.23 0.21 0.73 100

CARE 5 0.26 91.08 1.83 3.13 0.79 0.70 2.47 100

GRCA 3 0.24 42.65 55.95 0.62 0.16 0.12 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.24 27.92 70.46 0.73 0.18 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 1 0.33 22.49 73.90 1.64 0.41 0.29 1.26 100

MABE 0 0.18 27.59 70.65 0.80 0.20 0.13 0.63 100

MEVE 76 1.90 42.51 53.81 1.58 0.40 0.48 1.23 100

PECO 5 0.36 30.99 66.44 1.17 0.30 0.18 0.91 100

PEFO 3 0.18 28.46 69.86 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.61 100

SAPE 34 0.81 28.26 67.95 1.66 0.42 0.43 1.29 100

WEEL 4 0.33 32.22 63.43 1.95 0.49 0.38 1.52 100

WEMI 16 0.64 31.41 61.73 2.93 0.74 0.94 2.25 100

WHPE 0 0.31 44.36 54.39 0.55 0.14 0.11 0.44 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 10 0.54 35.39 60.04 1.99 0.50 0.54 1.53 100

BAND 8 0.50 37.47 59.77 1.22 0.31 0.27 0.96 100

BLCA 4 0.33 34.88 62.96 0.97 0.24 0.17 0.76 100

CANY 14 0.71 37.34 60.15 1.11 0.28 0.25 0.88 100

CARE 4 0.23 38.68 59.34 0.87 0.22 0.18 0.70 100

GRCA 1 0.20 50.52 47.83 0.73 0.18 0.14 0.60 100

GRSA 0 0.20 33.71 62.43 1.74 0.44 0.32 1.36 100

LAGA 0 0.28 39.01 59.09 0.84 0.21 0.18 0.66 100

MABE 0 0.16 34.97 59.07 2.76 0.70 0.30 2.21 100

MEVE 73 1.75 46.72 49.24 1.73 0.44 0.52 1.35 100

PECO 3 0.30 46.55 47.29 2.80 0.71 0.46 2.19 100

PEFO 0 0.17 93.49 1.65 2.16 0.55 0.44 1.70 100

SAPE 23 0.67 34.23 61.17 2.01 0.51 0.52 1.56 100

WEEL 1 0.27 39.32 55.42 2.36 0.60 0.46 1.84 100

WEMI 9 0.54 25.98 69.95 1.75 0.44 0.52 1.35 100

WHPE 0 0.26 52.36 46.16 0.65 0.17 0.13 0.52 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.72 30.15 61.20 2.06 1.26 2.13 3.19 100

BAND 15 0.71 23.24 69.03 1.92 1.18 1.63 2.99 100

BLCA 9 0.59 23.67 72.71 0.88 0.54 0.82 1.38 100

CANY 19 0.96 32.66 55.96 2.65 1.63 2.99 4.11 100

CARE 9 0.52 48.88 48.12 0.75 0.46 0.56 1.23 100

GRCA 3 0.26 91.93 1.11 1.76 1.08 1.29 2.83 100

GRSA 3 0.27 49.52 46.33 1.06 0.65 0.76 1.68 100

LAGA 5 0.43 22.09 71.73 1.75 1.07 0.58 2.78 100

MABE 0 0.25 27.57 67.94 1.12 0.69 0.91 1.76 100

MEVE 92 2.14 70.75 6.38 5.19 3.19 6.44 8.05 100

PECO 12 0.58 54.64 39.46 1.53 0.94 0.97 2.45 100

PEFO 1 0.24 88.09 6.50 1.41 0.87 0.86 2.28 100

SAPE 34 0.88 39.44 54.36 1.46 0.90 1.58 2.27 100

WEEL 4 0.38 22.78 73.96 0.83 0.51 0.60 1.31 100

WEMI 15 0.65 30.94 64.97 1.04 0.64 0.76 1.65 100

WHPE 4 0.37 24.02 69.82 1.56 0.96 1.20 2.46 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.66 29.12 65.81 2.19 0.55 0.65 1.68 100

BAND 8 0.61 31.91 64.13 1.75 0.44 0.40 1.36 100

BLCA 7 0.46 33.18 65.04 0.79 0.20 0.18 0.62 100

CANY 14 0.79 32.64 60.84 2.79 0.70 0.88 2.14 100

CARE 4 0.36 91.10 1.19 3.36 0.85 0.90 2.60 100

GRCA 0 0.19 52.76 43.76 1.54 0.39 0.32 1.23 100

GRSA 1 0.21 23.53 72.94 1.57 0.40 0.34 1.22 100

LAGA 3 0.33 21.25 74.88 1.79 0.45 0.16 1.47 100

MABE 0 0.18 22.58 74.94 1.09 0.27 0.27 0.85 100

MEVE 64 1.74 43.30 46.82 4.20 1.06 1.40 3.22 100

PECO 5 0.42 34.27 62.29 1.50 0.38 0.39 1.16 100

PEFO 1 0.17 72.31 23.90 1.69 0.43 0.30 1.36 100

SAPE 18 0.72 27.03 68.03 2.14 0.54 0.62 1.64 100

WEEL 2 0.35 23.08 74.48 1.07 0.27 0.28 0.83 100

WEMI 7 0.50 30.19 67.61 0.97 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

WHPE 2 0.28 90.86 5.64 1.60 0.40 0.26 1.24 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.55 35.09 58.78 2.65 0.67 0.78 2.03 100

BAND 8 0.50 28.62 67.27 1.80 0.46 0.47 1.39 100

BLCA 1 0.38 40.36 57.47 0.96 0.24 0.22 0.75 100

CANY 11 0.68 56.74 39.80 1.52 0.38 0.32 1.23 100

CARE 3 0.33 53.73 44.06 0.97 0.25 0.20 0.79 100

GRCA 0 0.18 94.07 0.99 2.19 0.55 0.46 1.74 100

GRSA 1 0.17 29.37 66.22 1.96 0.50 0.42 1.52 100

LAGA 1 0.27 44.37 53.03 1.16 0.29 0.22 0.93 100

MABE 0 0.14 28.24 68.66 1.36 0.34 0.34 1.06 100

MEVE 60 1.59 49.07 39.71 4.77 1.20 1.59 3.66 100

PECO 2 0.36 60.12 35.47 1.98 0.50 0.36 1.57 100

PEFO 0 0.16 90.50 5.58 1.76 0.44 0.31 1.41 100

SAPE 11 0.61 32.36 61.72 2.56 0.65 0.75 1.96 100

WEEL 0 0.28 28.69 68.28 1.32 0.33 0.35 1.03 100

WEMI 5 0.41 29.04 64.34 2.97 0.75 0.57 2.34 100

WHPE 1 0.24 29.04 66.47 2.00 0.50 0.43 1.57 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 1.05 38.73 59.14 0.54 0.33 0.40 0.86 100

BAND 9 0.54 77.25 16.22 1.66 1.02 1.24 2.61 100

BLCA 10 0.58 27.97 66.50 1.39 0.86 1.12 2.16 100

CANY 35 1.47 36.32 61.24 0.61 0.38 0.47 0.99 100

CARE 18 1.11 30.71 66.66 0.64 0.39 0.59 1.01 100

GRCA 7 0.48 31.01 66.45 0.63 0.39 0.51 1.00 100

GRSA 1 0.29 76.95 15.10 2.18 1.34 1.00 3.43 100

LAGA 4 0.40 40.66 56.73 0.68 0.42 0.44 1.09 100

MABE 1 0.24 69.36 25.32 1.36 0.84 0.94 2.18 100

MEVE 97 1.94 55.06 37.27 1.83 1.13 1.84 2.87 100

PECO 6 0.48 32.92 63.69 0.95 0.58 0.38 1.49 100

PEFO 5 0.44 29.28 67.84 0.68 0.42 0.71 1.07 100

SAPE 33 0.89 31.06 63.04 1.43 0.88 1.38 2.22 100

WEEL 6 0.38 38.50 56.07 1.42 0.88 0.88 2.25 100

WEMI 10 0.59 27.20 66.98 1.42 0.88 1.30 2.23 100

WHPE 5 0.37 30.24 67.03 0.72 0.44 0.43 1.14 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 0.88 35.06 63.08 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.66 100

BAND 3 0.38 26.97 70.54 1.12 0.29 0.20 0.87 100

BLCA 4 0.42 25.63 71.10 1.45 0.37 0.33 1.12 100

CANY 29 1.14 32.53 65.94 0.68 0.17 0.15 0.54 100

CARE 13 0.86 26.89 71.54 0.68 0.18 0.18 0.54 100

GRCA 5 0.36 27.72 70.68 0.70 0.18 0.16 0.55 100

GRSA 0 0.21 36.09 57.39 2.96 0.76 0.50 2.30 100

LAGA 1 0.28 36.17 62.10 0.77 0.20 0.14 0.61 100

MABE 0 0.20 33.07 64.29 1.19 0.31 0.21 0.94 100

MEVE 64 1.55 71.87 17.66 4.45 1.15 1.45 3.43 100

PECO 2 0.34 87.02 9.05 1.73 0.45 0.41 1.35 100

PEFO 2 0.29 85.93 11.66 1.07 0.28 0.21 0.85 100

SAPE 18 0.69 27.73 68.93 1.46 0.38 0.39 1.12 100

WEEL 4 0.30 33.81 63.19 1.36 0.35 0.23 1.07 100

WEMI 6 0.43 21.27 75.64 1.32 0.34 0.40 1.03 100

WHPE 2 0.28 27.76 70.47 0.80 0.21 0.13 0.63 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 16 0.79 39.99 57.86 0.95 0.24 0.20 0.76 100

BAND 1 0.31 30.99 64.97 1.84 0.47 0.30 1.43 100

BLCA 2 0.35 31.42 64.57 1.78 0.46 0.41 1.37 100

CANY 27 1.01 49.40 48.07 1.08 0.28 0.35 0.83 100

CARE 12 0.71 33.04 65.03 0.84 0.22 0.22 0.66 100

GRCA 4 0.29 34.30 63.73 0.87 0.22 0.20 0.68 100

GRSA 0 0.18 80.37 13.47 2.83 0.73 0.39 2.21 100

LAGA 0 0.25 82.77 12.53 2.07 0.53 0.47 1.62 100

MABE 0 0.17 40.27 56.52 1.45 0.37 0.25 1.14 100

MEVE 57 1.49 75.14 6.79 7.62 1.96 2.63 5.86 100

PECO 2 0.29 50.01 46.73 1.47 0.38 0.26 1.15 100

PEFO 2 0.29 85.93 11.66 1.07 0.28 0.21 0.85 100

SAPE 18 0.69 27.73 68.93 1.46 0.38 0.39 1.12 100

WEEL 1 0.25 41.07 55.28 1.65 0.42 0.28 1.29 100

WEMI 2 0.36 31.71 63.93 1.90 0.49 0.49 1.47 100

WHPE 2 0.22 34.73 63.06 1.00 0.26 0.17 0.79 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 15 0.84 33.46 63.61 0.73 0.45 0.58 1.17 100

BAND 20 0.81 53.16 38.54 2.16 1.33 1.41 3.39 100

BLCA 10 0.54 22.21 73.48 1.04 0.64 1.01 1.62 100

CANY 22 1.06 24.09 71.18 1.10 0.68 1.23 1.72 100

CARE 5 0.38 35.19 62.28 0.64 0.39 0.47 1.04 100

GRCA 3 0.34 47.06 50.82 0.54 0.33 0.35 0.90 100

GRSA 2 0.34 83.04 12.72 1.10 0.68 0.71 1.74 100

LAGA 4 0.45 81.97 13.16 1.28 0.79 0.74 2.05 100

MABE 0 0.25 28.95 63.55 2.07 1.28 0.79 3.36 100

MEVE 96 2.18 51.65 41.36 1.63 1.00 1.80 2.56 100

PECO 8 0.52 44.34 53.57 0.54 0.33 0.36 0.86 100

PEFO 5 0.27 91.57 1.90 1.66 1.02 1.20 2.65 100

SAPE 43 1.04 34.95 58.17 1.67 1.03 1.57 2.61 100

WEEL 5 0.43 35.21 57.78 1.81 1.12 1.23 2.86 100

WEMI 25 0.81 32.08 65.59 0.56 0.35 0.53 0.90 100

WHPE 4 0.41 34.54 59.79 1.49 0.92 0.93 2.35 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 12 0.65 29.14 67.09 1.64 0.42 0.45 1.27 100

BAND 10 0.56 52.56 41.80 2.54 0.65 0.47 1.98 100

BLCA 4 0.42 20.20 77.31 1.08 0.28 0.30 0.83 100

CANY 17 0.85 30.88 67.04 0.92 0.24 0.20 0.73 100

CARE 5 0.26 91.06 1.83 3.12 0.81 0.70 2.47 100

GRCA 3 0.24 42.57 56.03 0.62 0.16 0.12 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.23 28.00 70.38 0.73 0.19 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 1 0.32 22.47 73.91 1.64 0.42 0.29 1.27 100

MABE 0 0.19 28.63 66.47 2.26 0.58 0.24 1.82 100

MEVE 75 1.89 42.10 54.26 1.56 0.40 0.47 1.22 100

PECO 5 0.35 30.81 66.63 1.17 0.30 0.18 0.91 100

PEFO 3 0.18 28.47 69.84 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.61 100

SAPE 34 0.80 28.16 68.06 1.65 0.42 0.42 1.29 100

WEEL 4 0.33 24.93 71.68 1.47 0.38 0.41 1.13 100

WEMI 13 0.63 31.35 61.78 2.92 0.75 0.93 2.26 100

WHPE 0 0.30 44.20 54.55 0.55 0.14 0.11 0.44 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.54 35.26 60.17 1.98 0.51 0.54 1.54 100

BAND 6 0.49 37.43 59.81 1.22 0.31 0.27 0.96 100

BLCA 4 0.34 25.21 71.68 1.34 0.35 0.38 1.04 100

CANY 14 0.71 37.25 60.23 1.11 0.29 0.25 0.88 100

CARE 4 0.23 38.70 59.32 0.87 0.22 0.18 0.70 100

GRCA 1 0.20 50.42 47.92 0.73 0.19 0.14 0.60 100

GRSA 0 0.19 33.70 62.42 1.74 0.45 0.33 1.36 100

LAGA 0 0.27 39.05 59.06 0.84 0.22 0.18 0.67 100

MABE 0 0.16 40.78 54.76 2.01 0.52 0.36 1.58 100

MEVE 71 1.73 46.32 49.67 1.71 0.44 0.52 1.34 100

PECO 3 0.30 46.58 47.24 2.80 0.72 0.46 2.20 100

PEFO 0 0.17 93.49 1.65 2.15 0.56 0.44 1.71 100

SAPE 22 0.66 34.15 61.26 2.00 0.51 0.51 1.56 100

WEEL 1 0.27 30.78 65.04 1.81 0.47 0.50 1.40 100

WEMI 8 0.54 25.87 70.07 1.75 0.45 0.52 1.35 100

WHPE 0 0.26 36.50 61.80 0.75 0.19 0.15 0.60 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.74 30.46 60.93 2.04 1.26 2.14 3.18 100

BAND 15 0.71 23.48 68.94 1.88 1.16 1.60 2.93 100

BLCA 9 0.59 37.08 55.34 1.83 1.13 1.78 2.84 100

CANY 20 0.97 32.92 55.93 2.59 1.60 2.93 4.03 100

CARE 9 0.53 49.90 47.20 0.72 0.45 0.54 1.19 100

GRCA 3 0.27 92.31 1.07 1.68 1.03 1.22 2.69 100

GRSA 3 0.27 24.99 69.23 1.46 0.90 1.12 2.30 100

LAGA 5 0.43 22.20 71.74 1.71 1.06 0.56 2.72 100

MABE 0 0.24 24.98 71.07 0.97 0.60 0.87 1.52 100

MEVE 93 2.15 71.14 6.46 5.08 3.13 6.31 7.88 100

PECO 12 0.59 55.50 38.80 1.48 0.91 0.94 2.37 100

PEFO 1 0.25 88.57 6.28 1.34 0.83 0.81 2.17 100

SAPE 35 0.88 28.38 62.72 2.09 1.29 2.27 3.25 100

WEEL 5 0.39 23.21 73.59 0.82 0.50 0.58 1.29 100

WEMI 15 0.65 31.61 64.42 1.01 0.63 0.73 1.61 100

WHPE 4 0.38 24.18 69.77 1.52 0.94 1.18 2.41 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.63 28.93 66.06 2.16 0.56 0.63 1.67 100

BAND 8 0.60 23.30 73.35 1.46 0.38 0.38 1.13 100

BLCA 7 0.44 33.38 64.83 0.79 0.20 0.18 0.62 100

CANY 13 0.78 32.54 60.94 2.78 0.72 0.88 2.14 100

CARE 4 0.35 91.08 1.19 3.35 0.86 0.90 2.61 100

GRCA 0 0.18 52.85 43.67 1.54 0.40 0.32 1.23 100

GRSA 1 0.21 23.53 72.93 1.57 0.41 0.34 1.23 100

LAGA 3 0.32 21.23 74.90 1.79 0.46 0.16 1.47 100

MABE 0 0.18 22.92 75.41 0.73 0.19 0.18 0.57 100

MEVE 63 1.73 44.56 45.24 4.32 1.11 1.44 3.33 100

PECO 5 0.41 52.81 43.33 1.73 0.45 0.31 1.38 100

PEFO 1 0.17 31.86 65.63 1.13 0.29 0.18 0.92 100

SAPE 17 0.69 26.79 68.32 2.10 0.54 0.62 1.62 100

WEEL 1 0.33 23.22 75.05 0.76 0.19 0.19 0.59 100

WEMI 6 0.49 30.25 67.54 0.97 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

WHPE 2 0.28 90.85 5.63 1.59 0.41 0.26 1.24 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.53 34.84 59.13 2.60 0.67 0.76 2.01 100

BAND 7 0.49 28.60 67.28 1.80 0.46 0.47 1.39 100

BLCA 1 0.37 40.59 57.23 0.96 0.25 0.22 0.76 100

CANY 12 0.67 54.33 42.11 1.55 0.40 0.36 1.24 100

CARE 3 0.32 53.74 44.05 0.97 0.25 0.20 0.79 100

GRCA 0 0.17 94.07 0.98 2.18 0.56 0.46 1.74 100

GRSA 1 0.16 29.36 66.21 1.96 0.51 0.42 1.53 100

LAGA 0 0.26 26.64 68.50 2.24 0.58 0.20 1.84 100

MABE 0 0.14 40.85 56.95 0.96 0.25 0.24 0.75 100

MEVE 58 1.58 49.15 39.60 4.76 1.23 1.59 3.67 100

PECO 2 0.36 60.28 35.31 1.97 0.51 0.36 1.57 100

PEFO 1 0.17 31.86 65.63 1.13 0.29 0.18 0.92 100

SAPE 17 0.69 26.79 68.32 2.10 0.54 0.62 1.62 100

WEEL 0 0.26 29.19 68.62 0.95 0.24 0.24 0.75 100

WEMI 5 0.40 28.99 64.37 2.96 0.76 0.57 2.34 100

WHPE 1 0.23 29.01 66.48 1.99 0.51 0.43 1.57 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling

Nitrate Repartitioning - 1ppb NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree (4)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 63 3.88 29.98 65.42 1.19 0.73 0.68 1.99 100

BAND 83 1.76 25.84 70.52 0.96 0.59 0.60 1.50 100

BLCA 52 1.97 23.12 72.14 1.20 0.73 0.95 1.86 100

CANY 86 5.13 30.60 66.54 0.72 0.44 0.55 1.16 100

CARE 33 3.75 24.65 73.07 0.55 0.34 0.51 0.87 100

GRCA 14 1.76 26.45 71.33 0.56 0.34 0.41 0.91 100

GRSA 28 1.09 29.07 62.55 2.23 1.37 1.29 3.49 100

LAGA 48 1.46 24.79 71.54 0.90 0.55 0.84 1.40 100

MABE 19 0.89 19.82 73.71 1.62 0.99 1.35 2.52 100

MEVE 194 6.04 61.06 23.56 3.54 2.17 4.16 5.51 100

PECO 62 1.59 28.83 67.96 0.89 0.55 0.37 1.40 100

PEFO 21 1.34 37.69 58.19 1.04 0.64 0.76 1.68 100

SAPE 123 3.47 21.59 74.14 1.04 0.64 0.99 1.62 100

WEEL 51 1.45 23.15 73.90 0.75 0.46 0.53 1.21 100

WEMI 88 2.01 28.91 63.92 1.74 1.06 1.67 2.70 100

WHPE 46 1.32 84.34 10.11 1.38 0.85 1.15 2.18 100

Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 54 3.63 26.14 71.28 1.14 0.29 0.19 0.95 100

BAND 68 1.32 29.07 69.42 0.68 0.17 0.12 0.54 100

BLCA 37 1.49 27.25 70.10 1.19 0.30 0.23 0.93 100

CANY 72 4.80 28.49 70.10 0.62 0.16 0.13 0.49 100

CARE 31 2.89 23.77 74.85 0.60 0.15 0.15 0.47 100

GRCA 12 1.46 24.80 73.83 0.61 0.15 0.12 0.49 100

GRSA 21 0.83 29.17 65.57 2.39 0.61 0.40 1.85 100

LAGA 26 1.08 24.16 74.12 0.77 0.20 0.14 0.61 100

MABE 11 0.70 20.03 76.10 1.71 0.44 0.40 1.32 100

MEVE 173 5.27 25.48 71.07 1.47 0.37 0.48 1.13 100

PECO 49 1.20 35.48 62.23 1.02 0.26 0.20 0.80 100

PEFO 16 0.96 36.46 60.95 1.14 0.29 0.23 0.91 100

SAPE 107 2.68 20.98 76.53 1.09 0.28 0.28 0.84 100

WEEL 29 1.12 22.44 75.75 0.81 0.21 0.16 0.64 100

WEMI 65 1.56 21.65 75.52 1.21 0.31 0.39 0.93 100

WHPE 30 0.96 37.15 59.53 1.49 0.38 0.29 1.16 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 50 3.06 25.78 71.16 1.35 0.34 0.31 1.06 100

BAND 49 1.09 27.96 68.10 1.78 0.45 0.34 1.38 100

BLCA 30 1.22 33.89 62.82 1.48 0.38 0.28 1.16 100

CANY 69 4.04 35.25 63.02 0.77 0.20 0.16 0.61 100

CARE 29 2.36 29.97 68.29 0.76 0.19 0.19 0.60 100

GRCA 11 1.18 31.10 67.18 0.76 0.19 0.16 0.61 100

GRSA 14 0.69 35.23 58.42 2.89 0.74 0.48 2.24 100

LAGA 20 0.87 30.43 67.40 0.97 0.25 0.18 0.77 100

MABE 8 0.56 25.24 69.89 2.15 0.55 0.51 1.66 100

MEVE 167 4.63 68.12 15.50 6.91 1.77 2.38 5.31 100

PECO 42 1.01 84.15 11.58 1.91 0.49 0.38 1.49 100

PEFO 13 0.89 31.69 66.21 0.91 0.23 0.26 0.71 100

SAPE 96 2.19 26.34 70.53 1.37 0.35 0.36 1.05 100

WEEL 18 0.90 28.37 69.33 1.02 0.26 0.21 0.81 100

WEMI 55 1.29 27.20 69.11 1.57 0.40 0.51 1.21 100

WHPE 26 0.89 87.73 8.49 1.66 0.42 0.40 1.30 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling

Nitrate Repartitioning - 1 ppb NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree (4)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 49 2.93 21.16 75.39 0.85 0.52 0.74 1.34 100

BAND 102 2.55 25.19 70.67 1.08 0.66 0.67 1.71 100

BLCA 64 1.95 17.79 78.56 0.88 0.54 0.87 1.37 100

CANY 70 3.81 24.38 71.27 1.08 0.66 0.90 1.70 100

CARE 25 1.20 88.07 1.40 2.63 1.61 2.09 4.20 100

GRCA 16 1.28 35.67 62.58 0.44 0.27 0.29 0.74 100

GRSA 37 1.10 26.69 71.00 0.61 0.37 0.35 0.98 100

LAGA 72 1.45 22.21 74.60 0.81 0.50 0.58 1.30 100

MABE 25 0.85 27.13 69.91 0.76 0.47 0.52 1.22 100

MEVE 195 5.98 40.37 54.69 1.16 0.71 1.23 1.84 100

PECO 76 1.93 32.04 61.71 1.66 1.02 0.97 2.62 100

PEFO 19 0.86 27.40 70.14 0.63 0.39 0.40 1.04 100

SAPE 134 3.47 46.92 47.24 1.46 0.90 1.21 2.28 100

WEEL 52 1.47 23.60 71.12 1.28 0.78 1.24 1.98 100

WEMI 132 2.57 23.39 72.00 1.07 0.66 1.21 1.67 100

WHPE 47 1.44 42.09 56.16 0.45 0.27 0.31 0.73 100

Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 35 2.82 27.29 71.11 0.70 0.18 0.17 0.56 100

BAND 82 2.07 26.08 69.71 1.85 0.47 0.45 1.43 100

BLCA 42 1.56 20.99 77.05 0.87 0.22 0.20 0.67 100

CANY 61 3.29 23.00 74.53 1.09 0.28 0.25 0.85 100

CARE 19 0.93 26.49 72.34 0.51 0.13 0.12 0.41 100

GRCA 12 0.98 34.05 64.84 0.49 0.12 0.09 0.40 100

GRSA 20 0.80 25.18 73.35 0.66 0.17 0.11 0.53 100

LAGA 49 1.13 21.66 76.37 0.88 0.22 0.18 0.69 100

MABE 16 0.66 23.88 74.36 0.77 0.20 0.18 0.61 100

MEVE 177 5.67 30.72 67.01 0.97 0.25 0.28 0.76 100

PECO 54 1.47 32.10 63.84 1.84 0.47 0.31 1.44 100

PEFO 13 0.66 25.94 72.52 0.69 0.18 0.12 0.56 100

SAPE 117 2.91 27.67 68.39 1.72 0.44 0.45 1.33 100

WEEL 35 1.12 22.69 74.27 1.32 0.34 0.36 1.02 100

WEMI 99 2.00 20.06 76.79 1.36 0.35 0.40 1.05 100

WHPE 28 1.06 27.12 71.66 0.55 0.14 0.11 0.43 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 31 2.31 26.14 71.31 1.11 0.28 0.27 0.87 100

BAND 65 1.76 31.20 63.77 2.22 0.57 0.54 1.71 100

BLCA 34 1.26 26.50 71.01 1.09 0.28 0.26 0.85 100

CANY 60 2.72 31.70 66.17 0.94 0.24 0.21 0.74 100

CARE 19 0.80 35.32 62.88 0.79 0.20 0.17 0.64 100

GRCA 10 0.81 41.58 57.06 0.60 0.15 0.11 0.49 100

GRSA 14 0.65 31.48 66.69 0.82 0.21 0.14 0.66 100

LAGA 33 0.90 27.68 69.80 1.12 0.29 0.23 0.89 100

MABE 11 0.54 87.55 9.43 1.36 0.35 0.24 1.07 100

MEVE 169 5.30 35.11 61.32 1.54 0.39 0.44 1.20 100

PECO 45 1.23 38.90 56.18 2.23 0.57 0.38 1.74 100

PEFO 9 0.54 93.61 1.55 2.15 0.55 0.44 1.70 100

SAPE 109 2.61 46.66 49.62 1.65 0.42 0.38 1.27 100

WEEL 26 0.91 35.16 60.21 2.08 0.53 0.39 1.63 100

WEMI 79 1.77 41.97 56.32 0.76 0.19 0.15 0.61 100

WHPE 20 0.86 33.80 64.67 0.68 0.17 0.13 0.54 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling

Nitrate Repartitioning - 1ppb NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree (4)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 44 3.04 22.97 72.89 0.99 0.60 0.99 1.56 100

BAND 92 2.83 25.53 70.07 1.12 0.68 0.86 1.74 100

BLCA 43 2.15 32.21 62.82 1.19 0.73 1.17 1.87 100

CANY 61 3.75 32.48 65.63 0.47 0.29 0.36 0.77 100

CARE 27 1.61 87.50 0.87 2.81 1.72 2.68 4.41 100

GRCA 12 0.92 47.94 47.28 1.21 0.74 0.86 1.96 100

GRSA 32 0.96 42.44 53.87 0.95 0.58 0.67 1.50 100

LAGA 49 1.52 27.92 67.48 1.17 0.72 0.90 1.82 100

MABE 17 0.91 20.17 76.39 0.85 0.52 0.74 1.33 100

MEVE 182 5.85 28.35 66.46 1.19 0.73 1.43 1.85 100

PECO 81 2.23 40.55 56.89 0.68 0.41 0.39 1.08 100

PEFO 18 0.78 18.88 78.20 0.76 0.47 0.47 1.21 100

SAPE 140 3.35 26.53 67.27 1.49 0.91 1.49 2.32 100

WEEL 37 1.42 25.63 69.73 1.13 0.69 1.07 1.75 100

WEMI 104 2.25 28.72 68.06 0.82 0.50 0.59 1.32 100

WHPE 58 1.35 29.44 68.47 0.53 0.32 0.39 0.84 100

Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 34 2.71 22.19 75.32 1.07 0.27 0.30 0.84 100

BAND 69 2.14 25.04 72.32 1.18 0.30 0.25 0.91 100

BLCA 31 1.76 26.99 71.60 0.62 0.16 0.14 0.49 100

CANY 51 3.05 30.81 68.00 0.52 0.13 0.11 0.42 100

CARE 25 1.24 26.77 72.03 0.53 0.14 0.08 0.45 100

GRCA 10 0.68 45.83 51.15 1.34 0.34 0.27 1.07 100

GRSA 19 0.71 22.61 75.07 1.03 0.26 0.21 0.82 100

LAGA 36 1.15 35.52 62.27 0.98 0.25 0.22 0.76 100

MABE 14 0.65 19.66 78.34 0.88 0.22 0.21 0.69 100

MEVE 169 5.10 57.33 32.99 4.09 1.05 1.40 3.15 100

PECO 60 1.67 38.62 59.73 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.59 100

PEFO 11 0.60 65.22 31.37 1.53 0.39 0.27 1.23 100

SAPE 117 2.78 23.83 73.49 1.15 0.29 0.34 0.89 100

WEEL 25 1.09 28.07 69.57 1.03 0.26 0.25 0.81 100

WEMI 80 1.68 27.81 70.15 0.90 0.23 0.19 0.72 100

WHPE 34 1.15 28.67 70.05 0.57 0.14 0.12 0.45 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 29 2.22 27.76 69.12 1.34 0.34 0.37 1.05 100

BAND 65 1.76 30.99 65.75 1.45 0.37 0.32 1.13 100

BLCA 25 1.44 33.74 64.51 0.78 0.20 0.17 0.61 100

CANY 50 2.53 38.22 60.32 0.65 0.16 0.14 0.52 100

CARE 24 1.12 91.50 0.76 3.36 0.86 0.91 2.61 100

GRCA 9 0.59 53.12 43.38 1.55 0.40 0.32 1.24 100

GRSA 13 0.59 26.07 70.04 1.73 0.44 0.37 1.35 100

LAGA 24 0.97 42.82 54.51 1.18 0.30 0.27 0.92 100

MABE 8 0.52 25.08 72.38 1.12 0.29 0.26 0.88 100

MEVE 164 4.74 32.32 63.19 1.92 0.49 0.58 1.50 100

PECO 50 1.38 28.83 68.34 1.24 0.32 0.31 0.96 100

PEFO 9 0.53 23.41 74.25 1.05 0.27 0.19 0.83 100

SAPE 104 2.34 28.97 67.78 1.40 0.36 0.42 1.08 100

WEEL 22 0.90 34.48 62.61 1.27 0.32 0.31 1.00 100

WEMI 67 1.45 29.36 67.98 1.14 0.29 0.33 0.89 100

WHPE 26 0.93 35.59 62.82 0.70 0.18 0.15 0.56 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - 1ppb NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 19 1.10 19.01 77.17 0.95 0.58 0.78 1.51 100

BAND 4 0.36 22.47 72.83 1.27 0.77 0.68 1.98 100

BLCA 4 0.39 32.95 64.66 0.58 0.35 0.55 0.91 100

CANY 33 1.50 27.68 70.07 0.57 0.34 0.43 0.91 100

CARE 16 0.85 23.21 74.50 0.56 0.34 0.51 0.89 100

GRCA 7 0.39 24.41 73.35 0.57 0.34 0.41 0.92 100

GRSA 0 0.22 27.18 69.52 0.88 0.53 0.52 1.38 100

LAGA 2 0.29 23.67 73.56 0.73 0.44 0.45 1.16 100

MABE 1 0.19 18.91 74.76 1.59 0.96 1.32 2.47 100

MEVE 70 2.26 29.86 61.29 2.04 1.23 2.40 3.18 100

PECO 2 0.33 34.59 61.76 0.94 0.57 0.65 1.49 100

PEFO 2 0.26 35.35 60.49 1.06 0.64 0.75 1.71 100

SAPE 20 0.80 19.87 76.10 0.99 0.60 0.90 1.54 100

WEEL 4 0.33 21.87 75.20 0.75 0.45 0.52 1.20 100

WEMI 4 0.45 19.30 75.87 1.12 0.68 1.30 1.74 100

WHPE 2 0.27 35.33 59.48 1.35 0.82 0.90 2.13 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 17 0.86 21.45 76.02 1.09 0.28 0.30 0.86 100

BAND 1 0.29 24.57 72.22 1.47 0.38 0.23 1.14 100

BLCA 3 0.31 27.85 69.57 1.16 0.30 0.21 0.91 100

CANY 27 1.25 21.94 76.75 0.58 0.15 0.11 0.47 100

CARE 14 0.66 21.10 77.27 0.73 0.19 0.14 0.58 100

GRCA 5 0.34 24.25 74.40 0.60 0.15 0.12 0.48 100

GRSA 0 0.16 21.08 77.03 0.84 0.21 0.18 0.66 100

LAGA 0 0.22 24.76 73.54 0.76 0.20 0.14 0.60 100

MABE 0 0.15 19.83 76.38 1.68 0.43 0.39 1.30 100

MEVE 53 1.96 21.72 74.78 1.49 0.38 0.46 1.16 100

PECO 2 0.25 35.11 62.63 1.01 0.26 0.20 0.79 100

PEFO 2 0.19 24.50 73.18 1.03 0.26 0.22 0.81 100

SAPE 10 0.57 20.85 76.74 1.06 0.27 0.26 0.82 100

WEEL 1 0.25 22.38 75.51 0.92 0.23 0.23 0.72 100

WEMI 2 0.34 27.74 65.03 3.15 0.81 0.83 2.44 100

WHPE 2 0.23 29.48 68.87 0.76 0.19 0.10 0.61 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 13 0.69 27.14 69.65 1.39 0.35 0.38 1.08 100

BAND 1 0.23 37.66 57.02 2.35 0.60 0.51 1.85 100

BLCA 1 0.25 34.68 62.12 1.44 0.37 0.26 1.14 100

CANY 24 0.99 27.96 70.35 0.74 0.19 0.15 0.60 100

CARE 10 0.52 26.56 71.27 0.97 0.25 0.19 0.76 100

GRCA 4 0.27 30.48 67.82 0.75 0.19 0.15 0.61 100

GRSA 0 0.13 91.64 4.93 1.51 0.39 0.35 1.18 100

LAGA 0 0.18 31.15 66.71 0.96 0.25 0.17 0.76 100

MABE 0 0.12 25.03 70.18 2.12 0.54 0.49 1.64 100

MEVE 43 1.61 26.96 68.69 1.86 0.48 0.58 1.44 100

PECO 1 0.22 27.00 68.63 1.92 0.49 0.47 1.49 100

PEFO 2 0.17 31.80 66.11 0.91 0.23 0.25 0.71 100

SAPE 7 0.45 26.39 70.55 1.34 0.34 0.33 1.04 100

WEEL 0 0.20 28.26 69.08 1.16 0.30 0.29 0.91 100

WEMI 2 0.27 28.26 68.08 1.55 0.40 0.51 1.20 100

WHPE 1 0.19 36.47 61.48 0.94 0.24 0.12 0.76 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - 1 ppb NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 13 0.85 26.32 71.06 0.65 0.39 0.54 1.04 100

BAND 14 0.64 32.38 65.42 0.56 0.34 0.40 0.90 100

BLCA 4 0.43 20.28 76.52 0.80 0.48 0.66 1.26 100

CANY 20 1.02 21.11 75.03 0.97 0.59 0.77 1.53 100

CARE 5 0.26 26.17 71.88 0.48 0.29 0.40 0.77 100

GRCA 3 0.26 33.88 64.33 0.46 0.28 0.30 0.76 100

GRSA 0 0.21 35.27 62.28 0.63 0.38 0.42 1.01 100

LAGA 2 0.32 22.44 72.93 1.11 0.67 1.12 1.73 100

MABE 0 0.19 27.50 67.62 1.29 0.78 0.78 2.04 100

MEVE 86 2.56 23.45 70.72 1.39 0.84 1.42 2.17 100

PECO 4 0.42 30.30 63.38 1.68 1.02 0.97 2.65 100

PEFO 2 0.18 25.54 71.97 0.64 0.39 0.40 1.06 100

SAPE 38 1.00 33.45 62.06 1.13 0.69 0.92 1.76 100

WEEL 3 0.32 26.40 67.67 1.54 0.93 1.04 2.43 100

WEMI 13 0.59 18.86 75.96 1.23 0.75 1.28 1.92 100

WHPE 1 0.28 27.03 70.97 0.51 0.31 0.35 0.83 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 11 0.67 19.33 78.14 1.10 0.28 0.28 0.86 100

BAND 6 0.49 23.58 72.71 1.64 0.42 0.38 1.27 100

BLCA 4 0.33 22.97 75.69 0.61 0.16 0.10 0.48 100

CANY 16 0.80 21.96 75.77 1.00 0.26 0.22 0.79 100

CARE 3 0.20 88.04 4.45 3.32 0.85 0.73 2.61 100

GRCA 1 0.21 34.58 64.31 0.49 0.12 0.09 0.40 100

GRSA 0 0.15 24.98 73.55 0.66 0.17 0.11 0.53 100

LAGA 0 0.22 24.86 72.46 1.16 0.30 0.32 0.90 100

MABE 0 0.13 25.66 70.00 2.00 0.51 0.21 1.62 100

MEVE 73 2.23 23.15 73.73 1.33 0.34 0.42 1.03 100

PECO 3 0.32 30.12 65.86 1.82 0.47 0.30 1.43 100

PEFO 1 0.14 25.87 72.60 0.68 0.17 0.12 0.56 100

SAPE 23 0.75 35.06 62.13 1.24 0.32 0.28 0.96 100

WEEL 1 0.22 21.76 75.39 1.24 0.32 0.33 0.96 100

WEMI 9 0.52 20.83 77.20 0.85 0.22 0.23 0.67 100

WHPE 0 0.19 28.33 70.45 0.54 0.14 0.11 0.44 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.53 24.56 72.23 1.40 0.36 0.36 1.09 100

BAND 4 0.39 29.32 66.06 2.04 0.52 0.48 1.58 100

BLCA 2 0.26 26.18 71.36 1.08 0.28 0.25 0.85 100

CANY 15 0.63 27.88 69.25 1.27 0.32 0.28 1.00 100

CARE 1 0.16 33.21 65.31 0.64 0.16 0.15 0.52 100

GRCA 0 0.17 42.18 56.47 0.59 0.15 0.11 0.49 100

GRSA 0 0.13 34.43 61.81 1.69 0.43 0.31 1.33 100

LAGA 0 0.18 84.40 11.79 1.72 0.44 0.29 1.36 100

MABE 0 0.11 87.53 9.48 1.35 0.35 0.24 1.07 100

MEVE 52 1.83 28.91 67.19 1.66 0.43 0.53 1.29 100

PECO 3 0.26 39.06 55.97 2.25 0.57 0.38 1.76 100

PEFO 0 0.11 32.30 65.77 0.85 0.22 0.15 0.70 100

SAPE 13 0.63 42.17 54.46 1.49 0.38 0.34 1.16 100

WEEL 0 0.18 27.36 69.07 1.56 0.40 0.42 1.20 100

WEMI 5 0.41 26.41 71.10 1.08 0.28 0.30 0.84 100

WHPE 0 0.15 35.16 63.32 0.67 0.17 0.13 0.54 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - 1ppb NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 11 0.82 20.87 75.05 0.98 0.59 0.97 1.55 100

BAND 12 0.63 19.08 76.20 1.16 0.70 1.06 1.80 100

BLCA 6 0.48 27.14 70.61 0.57 0.34 0.43 0.91 100

CANY 16 0.90 30.20 67.87 0.48 0.29 0.37 0.78 100

CARE 5 0.36 25.80 72.34 0.49 0.29 0.25 0.83 100

GRCA 2 0.19 43.78 51.48 1.21 0.73 0.85 1.96 100

GRSA 1 0.20 26.85 70.79 0.59 0.35 0.49 0.93 100

LAGA 2 0.33 35.29 61.08 0.92 0.55 0.72 1.44 100

MABE 0 0.20 26.79 70.89 0.58 0.35 0.45 0.94 100

MEVE 72 2.20 35.97 53.41 2.44 1.48 2.92 3.79 100

PECO 7 0.46 38.09 59.27 0.70 0.42 0.41 1.12 100

PEFO 1 0.16 63.46 31.14 1.41 0.85 0.86 2.29 100

SAPE 23 0.86 21.57 74.23 0.99 0.60 1.05 1.55 100

WEEL 0 0.30 26.56 69.64 0.94 0.57 0.81 1.49 100

WEMI 9 0.52 39.22 42.79 4.30 2.60 4.39 6.69 100

WHPE 2 0.31 29.02 68.90 0.53 0.32 0.38 0.85 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.71 21.29 76.25 1.06 0.27 0.29 0.84 100

BAND 6 0.44 24.60 72.87 1.13 0.29 0.24 0.88 100

BLCA 2 0.36 29.60 69.04 0.59 0.15 0.14 0.47 100

CANY 14 0.71 30.76 68.06 0.52 0.13 0.11 0.42 100

CARE 3 0.28 25.55 73.27 0.52 0.13 0.08 0.44 100

GRCA 0 0.16 69.22 26.86 1.73 0.44 0.37 1.38 100

GRSA 1 0.16 23.97 73.79 1.00 0.25 0.20 0.79 100

LAGA 1 0.24 33.99 64.16 0.83 0.21 0.14 0.67 100

MABE 0 0.12 33.93 64.37 0.75 0.19 0.17 0.59 100

MEVE 62 1.77 38.13 53.99 3.35 0.86 1.09 2.59 100

PECO 4 0.34 23.05 74.83 0.97 0.25 0.15 0.76 100

PEFO 0 0.12 65.07 31.52 1.52 0.39 0.27 1.23 100

SAPE 13 0.65 25.06 72.61 1.00 0.26 0.30 0.78 100

WEEL 0 0.24 17.71 80.05 0.98 0.25 0.25 0.76 100

WEMI 3 0.39 23.31 71.01 2.46 0.63 0.68 1.92 100

WHPE 0 0.23 26.01 72.20 0.80 0.20 0.17 0.62 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.57 26.91 69.99 1.34 0.34 0.36 1.06 100

BAND 4 0.35 30.79 66.05 1.41 0.36 0.30 1.10 100

BLCA 0 0.29 36.52 61.81 0.73 0.19 0.17 0.59 100

CANY 12 0.58 48.38 49.91 0.75 0.19 0.16 0.61 100

CARE 2 0.23 91.43 0.86 3.34 0.86 0.90 2.61 100

GRCA 0 0.13 39.47 59.01 0.67 0.17 0.12 0.55 100

GRSA 1 0.13 30.07 67.12 1.25 0.32 0.25 0.99 100

LAGA 0 0.20 41.42 56.32 1.01 0.26 0.17 0.82 100

MABE 0 0.10 41.49 56.42 0.91 0.23 0.21 0.73 100

MEVE 55 1.54 44.21 46.66 3.88 0.99 1.26 3.00 100

PECO 1 0.28 45.46 52.55 0.89 0.23 0.15 0.71 100

PEFO 0 0.11 71.41 24.86 1.67 0.43 0.29 1.35 100

SAPE 11 0.53 31.25 65.85 1.25 0.32 0.37 0.97 100

WEEL 0 0.19 27.47 68.62 1.71 0.44 0.43 1.34 100

WEMI 3 0.32 28.88 64.08 3.05 0.78 0.84 2.38 100

WHPE 0 0.18 32.46 65.30 0.99 0.25 0.21 0.78 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - 1ppb NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 19 1.13 18.20 78.08 0.93 0.57 0.76 1.47 100

BAND 4 0.38 28.28 69.40 0.61 0.37 0.37 0.98 100

BLCA 4 0.41 25.05 70.89 1.06 0.64 0.70 1.66 100

CANY 33 1.53 19.28 77.14 0.89 0.54 0.74 1.41 100

CARE 16 0.88 22.11 75.66 0.54 0.33 0.49 0.86 100

GRCA 7 0.39 23.36 74.45 0.55 0.34 0.40 0.90 100

GRSA 0 0.24 25.67 66.55 2.08 1.26 1.19 3.25 100

LAGA 2 0.32 21.64 74.70 0.89 0.54 0.83 1.39 100

MABE 1 0.19 18.16 75.68 1.54 0.94 1.28 2.40 100

MEVE 69 2.32 30.15 60.76 2.09 1.27 2.47 3.25 100

PECO 2 0.34 25.68 71.14 0.88 0.53 0.39 1.38 100

PEFO 2 0.27 33.78 62.13 1.04 0.63 0.75 1.68 100

SAPE 20 0.83 18.87 77.21 0.96 0.58 0.88 1.49 100

WEEL 4 0.33 20.70 76.43 0.73 0.45 0.51 1.18 100

WEMI 5 0.46 25.80 67.31 1.67 1.02 1.61 2.59 100

WHPE 2 0.27 33.82 61.07 1.33 0.81 0.88 2.09 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 17 0.85 21.45 76.01 1.10 0.28 0.30 0.85 100

BAND 1 0.28 24.57 72.22 1.47 0.38 0.23 1.13 100

BLCA 3 0.31 27.86 69.56 1.17 0.30 0.21 0.91 100

CANY 27 1.24 21.94 76.75 0.58 0.15 0.11 0.47 100

CARE 14 0.66 21.11 77.26 0.73 0.19 0.14 0.57 100

GRCA 5 0.34 24.25 74.40 0.60 0.15 0.12 0.48 100

GRSA 0 0.16 21.09 77.02 0.84 0.22 0.18 0.66 100

LAGA 0 0.22 24.76 73.54 0.77 0.20 0.14 0.60 100

MABE 0 0.15 19.83 76.38 1.69 0.43 0.39 1.29 100

MEVE 53 1.95 21.71 74.78 1.50 0.38 0.46 1.15 100

PECO 2 0.25 35.11 62.63 1.01 0.26 0.20 0.79 100

PEFO 2 0.19 24.50 73.18 1.03 0.26 0.22 0.80 100

SAPE 10 0.57 20.85 76.73 1.07 0.27 0.26 0.82 100

WEEL 1 0.25 22.39 75.51 0.92 0.24 0.23 0.72 100

WEMI 2 0.34 27.74 65.02 3.17 0.81 0.83 2.43 100

WHPE 2 0.23 29.48 68.86 0.76 0.19 0.10 0.61 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 13 0.68 27.14 69.65 1.39 0.36 0.38 1.08 100

BAND 1 0.23 37.66 57.02 2.36 0.60 0.51 1.84 100

BLCA 1 0.25 34.68 62.11 1.45 0.37 0.26 1.13 100

CANY 24 0.99 27.96 70.35 0.75 0.19 0.15 0.60 100

CARE 10 0.52 26.56 71.26 0.98 0.25 0.19 0.76 100

GRCA 4 0.27 30.48 67.82 0.75 0.19 0.15 0.60 100

GRSA 0 0.13 91.63 4.93 1.52 0.39 0.35 1.18 100

LAGA 0 0.18 31.16 66.70 0.96 0.25 0.17 0.76 100

MABE 0 0.12 25.04 70.17 2.13 0.54 0.49 1.63 100

MEVE 43 1.60 26.96 68.69 1.87 0.48 0.58 1.43 100

PECO 1 0.22 27.00 68.63 1.93 0.49 0.47 1.48 100

PEFO 2 0.17 31.80 66.10 0.91 0.23 0.25 0.71 100

SAPE 7 0.45 26.39 70.54 1.35 0.35 0.34 1.03 100

WEEL 0 0.20 28.26 69.08 1.16 0.30 0.29 0.90 100

WEMI 2 0.27 28.26 68.07 1.56 0.40 0.51 1.20 100

WHPE 1 0.18 36.47 61.47 0.94 0.24 0.12 0.75 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - 1 ppb NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 13 0.85 19.58 75.93 1.09 0.66 1.04 1.70 100

BAND 14 0.65 30.87 66.96 0.55 0.34 0.39 0.88 100

BLCA 5 0.44 19.30 77.58 0.78 0.47 0.65 1.23 100

CANY 19 1.03 20.17 76.04 0.95 0.58 0.77 1.49 100

CARE 5 0.26 24.89 73.22 0.47 0.28 0.39 0.75 100

GRCA 3 0.26 32.09 66.15 0.45 0.27 0.29 0.75 100

GRSA 0 0.21 25.34 69.74 1.28 0.78 0.83 2.03 100

LAGA 1 0.33 20.10 76.77 0.80 0.49 0.57 1.27 100

MABE 0 0.18 23.56 69.84 1.84 1.12 0.67 2.98 100

MEVE 86 2.59 22.64 71.71 1.34 0.82 1.38 2.10 100

PECO 4 0.42 28.94 64.93 1.63 0.99 0.95 2.57 100

PEFO 2 0.18 24.28 73.28 0.63 0.38 0.39 1.03 100

SAPE 38 1.02 31.96 63.64 1.10 0.67 0.90 1.72 100

WEEL 4 0.33 25.41 68.75 1.51 0.92 1.03 2.38 100

WEMI 16 0.59 39.10 52.36 2.01 1.23 2.17 3.13 100

WHPE 0 0.29 25.62 72.45 0.49 0.30 0.34 0.80 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 11 0.67 19.34 78.13 1.11 0.28 0.28 0.86 100

BAND 6 0.48 23.57 72.71 1.65 0.42 0.38 1.27 100

BLCA 4 0.33 22.97 75.68 0.61 0.16 0.10 0.48 100

CANY 16 0.79 21.97 75.77 1.01 0.26 0.22 0.78 100

CARE 3 0.20 88.04 4.45 3.33 0.85 0.73 2.60 100

GRCA 1 0.21 34.59 64.31 0.49 0.13 0.09 0.40 100

GRSA 0 0.15 24.98 73.55 0.66 0.17 0.11 0.53 100

LAGA 0 0.22 24.86 72.46 1.17 0.30 0.32 0.90 100

MABE 0 0.13 25.66 70.00 2.01 0.52 0.21 1.61 100

MEVE 73 2.22 23.14 73.73 1.34 0.34 0.42 1.03 100

PECO 3 0.31 30.12 65.86 1.83 0.47 0.30 1.42 100

PEFO 1 0.14 25.87 72.60 0.69 0.18 0.12 0.56 100

SAPE 22 0.75 35.06 62.13 1.25 0.32 0.28 0.96 100

WEEL 1 0.22 21.76 75.39 1.24 0.32 0.33 0.95 100

WEMI 8 0.51 20.83 77.20 0.85 0.22 0.23 0.66 100

WHPE 0 0.19 28.33 70.45 0.55 0.14 0.11 0.43 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.53 24.56 72.23 1.41 0.36 0.36 1.09 100

BAND 4 0.39 29.32 66.05 2.05 0.52 0.48 1.58 100

BLCA 2 0.26 26.18 71.36 1.09 0.28 0.25 0.84 100

CANY 15 0.63 27.88 69.24 1.28 0.33 0.28 0.99 100

CARE 1 0.16 33.22 65.30 0.65 0.17 0.15 0.51 100

GRCA 0 0.17 42.18 56.47 0.60 0.15 0.11 0.49 100

GRSA 0 0.13 34.43 61.80 1.70 0.43 0.31 1.32 100

LAGA 0 0.18 84.40 11.79 1.73 0.44 0.29 1.35 100

MABE 0 0.11 87.52 9.48 1.36 0.35 0.24 1.06 100

MEVE 51 1.82 28.91 67.19 1.67 0.43 0.53 1.28 100

PECO 3 0.26 39.06 55.97 2.26 0.58 0.38 1.76 100

PEFO 0 0.11 32.30 65.77 0.86 0.22 0.15 0.70 100

SAPE 13 0.63 42.16 54.46 1.50 0.38 0.34 1.15 100

WEEL 0 0.18 27.35 69.06 1.56 0.40 0.42 1.20 100

WEMI 5 0.41 26.41 71.09 1.08 0.28 0.30 0.84 100

WHPE 0 0.15 35.16 63.32 0.68 0.17 0.13 0.54 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - 1ppb NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 11 0.78 20.09 75.95 0.94 0.57 0.94 1.50 100

BAND 12 0.65 22.33 73.58 1.04 0.63 0.79 1.63 100

BLCA 7 0.49 20.81 76.57 0.65 0.39 0.55 1.04 100

CANY 16 0.91 28.74 69.37 0.47 0.29 0.36 0.77 100

CARE 5 0.36 24.47 73.71 0.47 0.29 0.24 0.81 100

GRCA 2 0.19 42.19 53.09 1.20 0.73 0.85 1.94 100

GRSA 1 0.20 25.64 72.07 0.57 0.35 0.46 0.91 100

LAGA 2 0.33 34.84 61.60 0.90 0.55 0.70 1.41 100

MABE 0 0.20 17.77 78.88 0.83 0.51 0.71 1.31 100

MEVE 72 2.21 21.10 74.57 0.99 0.60 1.19 1.55 100

PECO 7 0.47 36.46 60.93 0.69 0.42 0.40 1.10 100

PEFO 1 0.16 61.93 32.63 1.41 0.86 0.86 2.30 100

SAPE 23 0.87 20.42 75.46 0.97 0.59 1.03 1.52 100

WEEL 0 0.32 25.28 71.00 0.92 0.56 0.79 1.45 100

WEMI 9 0.53 41.23 39.88 4.51 2.75 4.60 7.02 100

WHPE 2 0.30 27.31 70.64 0.52 0.32 0.39 0.83 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.71 21.29 76.25 1.06 0.27 0.29 0.83 100

BAND 6 0.43 24.61 72.87 1.13 0.29 0.24 0.87 100

BLCA 2 0.36 29.60 69.04 0.60 0.15 0.14 0.47 100

CANY 14 0.70 30.77 68.05 0.52 0.13 0.11 0.42 100

CARE 3 0.28 25.56 73.27 0.52 0.13 0.08 0.44 100

GRCA 0 0.16 69.23 26.85 1.73 0.44 0.37 1.37 100

GRSA 1 0.16 23.97 73.79 1.00 0.26 0.20 0.79 100

LAGA 1 0.24 33.99 64.15 0.83 0.21 0.14 0.67 100

MABE 0 0.12 33.93 64.36 0.75 0.19 0.17 0.59 100

MEVE 62 1.76 38.12 54.00 3.36 0.86 1.09 2.57 100

PECO 4 0.34 23.05 74.83 0.97 0.25 0.15 0.75 100

PEFO 0 0.12 65.07 31.52 1.53 0.39 0.27 1.23 100

SAPE 13 0.65 25.06 72.61 1.00 0.26 0.30 0.77 100

WEEL 0 0.24 17.71 80.05 0.98 0.25 0.25 0.76 100

WEMI 3 0.39 23.31 71.00 2.47 0.63 0.68 1.91 100

WHPE 0 0.23 26.01 72.20 0.80 0.20 0.17 0.62 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.56 26.91 69.99 1.34 0.34 0.37 1.05 100

BAND 4 0.35 30.79 66.04 1.42 0.36 0.30 1.09 100

BLCA 0 0.29 36.52 61.81 0.74 0.19 0.17 0.58 100

CANY 12 0.57 48.38 49.91 0.75 0.19 0.16 0.60 100

CARE 2 0.23 91.42 0.86 3.36 0.86 0.90 2.59 100

GRCA 0 0.13 39.48 59.01 0.67 0.17 0.12 0.55 100

GRSA 1 0.13 30.08 67.11 1.26 0.32 0.25 0.99 100

LAGA 0 0.19 41.43 56.32 1.02 0.26 0.17 0.81 100

MABE 0 0.10 41.50 56.41 0.92 0.24 0.21 0.72 100

MEVE 54 1.54 44.19 46.66 3.90 1.00 1.27 2.98 100

PECO 1 0.28 45.46 52.55 0.90 0.23 0.15 0.71 100

PEFO 0 0.11 71.41 24.85 1.68 0.43 0.29 1.34 100

SAPE 11 0.52 31.25 65.84 1.25 0.32 0.37 0.96 100

WEEL 0 0.19 27.47 68.61 1.72 0.44 0.43 1.33 100

WEMI 3 0.32 28.88 64.07 3.07 0.78 0.84 2.37 100

WHPE 0 0.18 32.46 65.30 1.00 0.26 0.21 0.78 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - 1ppb NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 26 1.57 20.29 75.89 0.95 0.58 0.77 1.51 100

BAND 16 0.60 22.77 72.09 1.33 0.82 0.93 2.07 100

BLCA 11 0.68 23.71 71.46 1.22 0.75 0.98 1.89 100

CANY 44 2.01 22.20 74.01 0.93 0.57 0.80 1.48 100

CARE 20 1.30 25.11 72.63 0.55 0.34 0.51 0.86 100

GRCA 9 0.55 27.58 70.19 0.56 0.35 0.41 0.91 100

GRSA 2 0.34 28.57 68.05 0.89 0.55 0.55 1.39 100

LAGA 5 0.48 23.48 73.51 0.76 0.47 0.56 1.21 100

MABE 3 0.28 20.47 72.88 1.66 1.02 1.39 2.58 100

MEVE 105 3.05 41.43 41.99 3.84 2.36 4.42 5.96 100

PECO 10 0.53 29.57 67.24 0.89 0.55 0.35 1.40 100

PEFO 5 0.45 38.33 57.58 1.03 0.63 0.76 1.66 100

SAPE 39 1.23 27.44 69.21 0.82 0.50 0.74 1.28 100

WEEL 7 0.45 32.62 65.62 0.47 0.29 0.26 0.74 100

WEMI 16 0.71 19.95 75.15 1.14 0.70 1.25 1.79 100

WHPE 6 0.44 84.18 10.46 1.34 0.82 1.11 2.10 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 21 1.33 19.89 77.74 1.05 0.26 0.23 0.82 100

BAND 5 0.43 22.99 74.02 1.37 0.35 0.22 1.06 100

BLCA 6 0.49 26.43 70.93 1.19 0.30 0.23 0.92 100

CANY 35 1.67 20.87 76.89 0.98 0.25 0.24 0.77 100

CARE 17 0.99 23.26 75.38 0.59 0.15 0.15 0.46 100

GRCA 7 0.44 24.95 73.68 0.61 0.15 0.13 0.48 100

GRSA 0 0.27 28.15 66.77 2.31 0.58 0.39 1.79 100

LAGA 4 0.35 23.76 74.52 0.77 0.20 0.14 0.61 100

MABE 2 0.22 19.97 76.16 1.71 0.43 0.41 1.32 100

MEVE 77 2.42 22.60 75.76 0.70 0.18 0.22 0.54 100

PECO 3 0.39 35.16 62.59 1.01 0.25 0.20 0.79 100

PEFO 4 0.32 35.88 61.57 1.13 0.29 0.23 0.90 100

SAPE 27 0.95 20.25 77.31 1.07 0.27 0.28 0.82 100

WEEL 5 0.36 22.23 75.96 0.81 0.20 0.17 0.64 100

WEMI 9 0.52 28.06 67.78 1.82 0.46 0.49 1.40 100

WHPE 2 0.31 35.74 61.06 1.44 0.36 0.28 1.12 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 19 1.06 25.29 71.70 1.33 0.34 0.30 1.05 100

BAND 2 0.36 27.75 68.32 1.77 0.45 0.34 1.37 100

BLCA 4 0.39 33.01 63.69 1.48 0.37 0.29 1.15 100

CANY 30 1.34 26.45 70.72 1.25 0.31 0.30 0.98 100

CARE 14 0.79 29.44 68.84 0.75 0.19 0.19 0.59 100

GRCA 7 0.35 31.34 66.93 0.76 0.19 0.16 0.61 100

GRSA 0 0.22 34.35 59.46 2.82 0.71 0.47 2.18 100

LAGA 1 0.28 36.53 61.75 0.77 0.19 0.15 0.61 100

MABE 0 0.17 25.19 69.93 2.16 0.55 0.51 1.66 100

MEVE 71 2.11 35.00 59.44 2.37 0.60 0.76 1.82 100

PECO 2 0.33 83.43 12.33 1.90 0.48 0.37 1.48 100

PEFO 2 0.28 88.91 8.61 1.11 0.28 0.22 0.88 100

SAPE 17 0.76 25.65 71.26 1.35 0.34 0.36 1.04 100

WEEL 4 0.29 28.17 69.52 1.02 0.26 0.21 0.81 100

WEMI 4 0.43 38.99 58.82 0.99 0.25 0.18 0.77 100

WHPE 2 0.29 36.01 61.95 0.94 0.24 0.12 0.75 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - 1 ppb NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 19 1.00 25.02 70.59 1.04 0.64 1.06 1.63 100

BAND 24 0.97 23.54 70.12 1.56 0.96 1.39 2.43 100

BLCA 14 0.63 18.31 77.99 0.89 0.55 0.87 1.39 100

CANY 26 1.21 27.31 69.88 0.70 0.43 0.55 1.12 100

CARE 5 0.40 88.20 1.52 2.56 1.57 2.06 4.08 100

GRCA 4 0.40 38.61 58.67 0.70 0.43 0.46 1.14 100

GRSA 4 0.41 24.01 73.37 0.70 0.43 0.38 1.10 100

LAGA 8 0.50 22.23 71.08 1.69 1.04 1.33 2.63 100

MABE 1 0.27 28.10 68.95 0.76 0.47 0.51 1.21 100

MEVE 109 3.49 24.22 71.80 0.95 0.58 0.98 1.48 100

PECO 11 0.64 31.85 62.09 1.60 0.99 0.94 2.53 100

PEFO 5 0.27 28.59 68.94 0.63 0.39 0.40 1.04 100

SAPE 51 1.48 25.87 69.84 1.06 0.65 0.92 1.66 100

WEEL 7 0.50 29.90 63.98 1.58 0.97 1.06 2.50 100

WEMI 33 1.03 30.27 55.86 3.21 1.97 3.70 4.98 100

WHPE 7 0.45 43.53 54.74 0.44 0.27 0.30 0.72 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 13 0.88 21.35 75.89 1.20 0.30 0.33 0.93 100

BAND 16 0.75 32.70 65.95 0.60 0.15 0.12 0.47 100

BLCA 9 0.52 20.78 77.27 0.86 0.22 0.21 0.67 100

CANY 21 1.12 19.54 78.13 1.00 0.25 0.30 0.77 100

CARE 5 0.28 26.39 72.44 0.51 0.13 0.12 0.40 100

GRCA 3 0.30 33.60 65.30 0.49 0.12 0.09 0.40 100

GRSA 0 0.26 25.26 73.28 0.66 0.17 0.11 0.53 100

LAGA 3 0.35 21.53 76.49 0.88 0.22 0.18 0.69 100

MABE 0 0.21 25.68 69.94 2.03 0.51 0.22 1.62 100

MEVE 87 2.86 22.26 75.45 0.99 0.25 0.29 0.77 100

PECO 7 0.48 31.05 65.04 1.78 0.45 0.30 1.39 100

PEFO 4 0.20 25.87 72.60 0.68 0.17 0.12 0.56 100

SAPE 42 1.14 24.39 72.96 1.17 0.29 0.29 0.91 100

WEEL 4 0.39 27.66 68.61 1.67 0.42 0.33 1.31 100

WEMI 22 0.79 19.17 78.62 0.96 0.24 0.28 0.74 100

WHPE 0 0.34 39.79 59.09 0.50 0.13 0.10 0.40 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 12 0.70 26.96 69.56 1.52 0.38 0.41 1.17 100

BAND 12 0.62 39.99 58.36 0.73 0.19 0.15 0.58 100

BLCA 4 0.41 26.34 71.20 1.09 0.27 0.26 0.84 100

CANY 16 0.89 24.83 72.22 1.27 0.32 0.39 0.98 100

CARE 5 0.25 35.22 62.99 0.79 0.20 0.16 0.64 100

GRCA 3 0.25 41.11 57.54 0.60 0.15 0.11 0.49 100

GRSA 0 0.21 85.42 11.36 1.45 0.37 0.27 1.14 100

LAGA 1 0.28 84.33 11.92 1.70 0.43 0.28 1.34 100

MABE 0 0.17 87.28 9.71 1.36 0.34 0.24 1.07 100

MEVE 81 2.37 29.40 66.35 1.82 0.46 0.56 1.40 100

PECO 4 0.40 37.91 57.32 2.17 0.55 0.37 1.69 100

PEFO 1 0.17 93.49 1.65 2.16 0.55 0.44 1.70 100

SAPE 36 0.92 30.47 66.21 1.46 0.37 0.36 1.13 100

WEEL 4 0.31 34.39 61.00 2.07 0.52 0.40 1.61 100

WEMI 12 0.62 24.38 72.80 1.22 0.31 0.35 0.94 100

WHPE 0 0.29 47.75 50.91 0.60 0.15 0.12 0.48 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - 1ppb NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 16 0.94 23.46 72.52 0.95 0.59 0.97 1.51 100

BAND 25 1.01 24.69 71.07 1.07 0.66 0.83 1.67 100

BLCA 11 0.76 26.94 68.80 1.03 0.63 0.98 1.62 100

CANY 23 1.26 33.30 64.85 0.46 0.29 0.35 0.75 100

CARE 11 0.54 28.70 66.04 1.27 0.78 1.21 2.00 100

GRCA 4 0.31 47.27 48.17 1.16 0.71 0.82 1.87 100

GRSA 3 0.31 43.09 53.30 0.93 0.57 0.66 1.46 100

LAGA 8 0.52 40.55 55.96 0.89 0.55 0.66 1.40 100

MABE 0 0.31 22.87 72.56 1.10 0.68 1.07 1.72 100

MEVE 105 2.92 35.60 56.23 1.91 1.18 2.12 2.97 100

PECO 19 0.75 41.68 55.78 0.67 0.41 0.39 1.06 100

PEFO 3 0.24 32.31 64.02 0.96 0.59 0.54 1.58 100

SAPE 52 1.25 27.23 68.49 1.01 0.62 1.09 1.57 100

WEEL 7 0.44 27.52 68.69 0.93 0.57 0.82 1.46 100

WEMI 22 0.81 27.40 68.93 0.88 0.54 0.85 1.39 100

WHPE 6 0.42 90.31 4.78 1.31 0.80 0.75 2.05 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 13 0.84 21.83 75.78 1.03 0.26 0.29 0.81 100

BAND 14 0.78 23.98 73.46 1.14 0.29 0.25 0.88 100

BLCA 10 0.61 24.17 72.43 1.48 0.37 0.40 1.14 100

CANY 17 1.07 23.31 74.92 0.79 0.20 0.16 0.63 100

CARE 7 0.42 26.87 70.05 1.34 0.34 0.35 1.05 100

GRCA 3 0.22 44.53 52.53 1.30 0.33 0.27 1.04 100

GRSA 2 0.23 25.94 72.51 0.72 0.18 0.08 0.56 100

LAGA 4 0.38 37.45 60.36 0.98 0.25 0.21 0.76 100

MABE 0 0.22 19.48 78.52 0.88 0.22 0.21 0.69 100

MEVE 83 2.41 22.51 74.84 1.13 0.28 0.38 0.87 100

PECO 9 0.55 38.31 60.04 0.74 0.19 0.13 0.59 100

PEFO 1 0.19 18.29 79.90 0.82 0.21 0.15 0.64 100

SAPE 32 1.02 21.75 75.73 1.09 0.27 0.33 0.84 100

WEEL 4 0.39 27.03 70.68 1.00 0.25 0.25 0.78 100

WEMI 15 0.58 46.86 41.17 5.19 1.31 1.49 3.99 100

WHPE 3 0.33 34.28 64.31 0.64 0.16 0.09 0.51 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 10 0.67 27.56 69.42 1.30 0.33 0.37 1.02 100

BAND 10 0.63 30.02 66.77 1.43 0.36 0.32 1.10 100

BLCA 7 0.49 30.07 65.71 1.84 0.47 0.49 1.42 100

CANY 15 0.85 29.47 68.28 0.99 0.25 0.21 0.80 100

CARE 3 0.36 91.41 0.86 3.37 0.85 0.91 2.61 100

GRCA 2 0.19 52.07 44.49 1.52 0.38 0.31 1.22 100

GRSA 1 0.19 48.01 49.20 1.25 0.31 0.26 0.97 100

LAGA 1 0.32 44.87 52.50 1.17 0.30 0.26 0.91 100

MABE 0 0.17 24.91 72.54 1.13 0.29 0.26 0.88 100

MEVE 73 2.05 45.59 47.02 3.14 0.79 1.05 2.41 100

PECO 6 0.46 46.04 51.99 0.89 0.23 0.15 0.70 100

PEFO 1 0.16 90.50 5.58 1.76 0.44 0.31 1.41 100

SAPE 20 0.82 27.34 69.48 1.37 0.35 0.41 1.05 100

WEEL 1 0.31 26.97 71.02 0.88 0.22 0.22 0.69 100

WEMI 8 0.52 38.37 51.50 4.46 1.13 1.11 3.43 100

WHPE 2 0.28 92.33 4.11 1.62 0.41 0.27 1.26 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - 1ppb NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 26 1.60 21.50 74.61 0.98 0.61 0.74 1.56 100

BAND 17 0.60 28.83 68.20 0.75 0.46 0.58 1.18 100

BLCA 11 0.67 23.99 71.26 1.19 0.74 0.96 1.86 100

CANY 45 2.00 21.46 74.32 1.01 0.63 1.00 1.58 100

CARE 21 1.31 25.72 72.08 0.53 0.33 0.50 0.84 100

GRCA 9 0.56 28.24 69.59 0.55 0.34 0.40 0.88 100

GRSA 2 0.35 29.11 67.59 0.87 0.54 0.53 1.36 100

LAGA 5 0.49 26.21 70.21 0.87 0.54 0.81 1.36 100

MABE 3 0.28 20.53 72.95 1.63 1.00 1.36 2.53 100

MEVE 104 3.03 32.66 56.59 2.45 1.51 2.97 3.81 100

PECO 10 0.53 30.14 66.75 0.87 0.53 0.35 1.36 100

PEFO 6 0.45 87.05 9.65 0.84 0.52 0.59 1.35 100

SAPE 41 1.24 21.71 74.16 1.00 0.62 0.96 1.55 100

WEEL 7 0.46 33.46 64.83 0.45 0.28 0.26 0.72 100

WEMI 17 0.70 20.22 74.99 1.12 0.69 1.23 1.75 100

WHPE 6 0.45 84.71 10.19 1.27 0.78 1.05 2.00 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 21 1.31 19.89 77.74 1.04 0.27 0.23 0.82 100

BAND 5 0.42 29.25 69.25 0.67 0.17 0.12 0.53 100

BLCA 6 0.48 22.59 74.52 1.28 0.33 0.29 0.99 100

CANY 34 1.66 20.86 76.90 0.98 0.25 0.23 0.77 100

CARE 17 0.99 23.31 75.33 0.59 0.15 0.15 0.46 100

GRCA 7 0.43 24.96 73.66 0.61 0.16 0.13 0.49 100

GRSA 0 0.27 28.12 66.80 2.31 0.59 0.39 1.79 100

LAGA 4 0.35 29.06 69.56 0.62 0.16 0.12 0.49 100

MABE 2 0.22 19.96 76.16 1.71 0.44 0.41 1.32 100

MEVE 77 2.39 22.59 75.77 0.70 0.18 0.22 0.54 100

PECO 3 0.38 35.00 62.75 1.01 0.26 0.20 0.79 100

PEFO 4 0.31 35.90 61.54 1.13 0.29 0.23 0.90 100

SAPE 25 0.94 20.24 77.32 1.06 0.27 0.28 0.82 100

WEEL 5 0.36 22.09 76.08 0.81 0.21 0.17 0.64 100

WEMI 9 0.51 28.05 67.78 1.81 0.47 0.49 1.40 100

WHPE 2 0.30 35.82 60.97 1.44 0.37 0.28 1.12 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 19 1.04 25.29 71.69 1.33 0.34 0.30 1.05 100

BAND 2 0.35 27.75 68.31 1.77 0.46 0.34 1.37 100

BLCA 4 0.39 40.46 57.78 0.76 0.20 0.21 0.59 100

CANY 30 1.33 26.44 70.72 1.24 0.32 0.30 0.98 100

CARE 14 0.79 29.50 68.78 0.75 0.19 0.19 0.59 100

GRCA 7 0.35 31.35 66.92 0.76 0.20 0.16 0.61 100

GRSA 0 0.22 34.31 59.49 2.82 0.73 0.48 2.19 100

LAGA 0 0.28 36.22 62.06 0.77 0.20 0.14 0.61 100

MABE 0 0.17 25.17 69.94 2.16 0.56 0.51 1.67 100

MEVE 71 2.08 41.20 52.01 2.88 0.74 0.95 2.22 100

PECO 2 0.32 83.43 12.33 1.90 0.49 0.37 1.48 100

PEFO 4 0.31 35.90 61.54 1.13 0.29 0.23 0.90 100

SAPE 25 0.94 20.24 77.32 1.06 0.27 0.28 0.82 100

WEEL 4 0.28 28.01 69.68 1.03 0.26 0.21 0.82 100

WEMI 4 0.42 34.54 60.21 2.28 0.59 0.62 1.76 100

WHPE 2 0.28 36.06 61.89 0.94 0.24 0.12 0.75 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - 1 ppb NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 19 1.05 25.40 70.27 1.03 0.63 1.06 1.61 100

BAND 25 0.98 23.94 69.83 1.54 0.95 1.36 2.39 100

BLCA 14 0.64 18.60 77.81 0.87 0.54 0.84 1.35 100

CANY 26 1.22 27.93 69.33 0.69 0.42 0.54 1.10 100

CARE 5 0.41 88.77 1.47 2.43 1.50 1.95 3.88 100

GRCA 4 0.41 39.46 57.90 0.67 0.42 0.44 1.10 100

GRSA 4 0.39 24.57 72.88 0.69 0.42 0.36 1.08 100

LAGA 7 0.49 23.60 70.60 1.52 0.94 0.97 2.37 100

MABE 2 0.27 28.73 68.37 0.74 0.46 0.50 1.19 100

MEVE 110 3.51 25.67 71.36 0.70 0.43 0.75 1.10 100

PECO 12 0.65 32.51 61.55 1.57 0.97 0.92 2.48 100

PEFO 5 0.27 29.19 68.41 0.62 0.38 0.39 1.02 100

SAPE 51 1.48 26.41 69.38 1.04 0.64 0.90 1.63 100

WEEL 7 0.49 23.62 71.38 1.21 0.74 1.18 1.87 100

WEMI 32 1.03 30.31 56.03 3.16 1.95 3.64 4.91 100

WHPE 7 0.46 44.72 53.60 0.43 0.26 0.29 0.69 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 13 0.88 21.33 75.90 1.20 0.31 0.33 0.93 100

BAND 16 0.73 32.71 65.93 0.60 0.16 0.12 0.48 100

BLCA 8 0.51 20.80 77.25 0.85 0.22 0.20 0.67 100

CANY 22 1.11 19.59 78.11 0.99 0.25 0.30 0.76 100

CARE 5 0.27 26.40 72.43 0.51 0.13 0.12 0.40 100

GRCA 3 0.30 33.52 65.38 0.49 0.13 0.09 0.40 100

GRSA 0 0.26 21.36 77.06 0.70 0.18 0.12 0.57 100

LAGA 2 0.35 21.57 76.45 0.88 0.23 0.18 0.70 100

MABE 0 0.21 25.67 69.94 2.02 0.52 0.22 1.63 100

MEVE 87 2.82 22.22 75.49 0.99 0.25 0.29 0.77 100

PECO 7 0.47 31.11 64.97 1.78 0.46 0.30 1.39 100

PEFO 4 0.20 25.88 72.58 0.69 0.18 0.12 0.56 100

SAPE 42 1.11 24.36 72.96 1.17 0.30 0.29 0.91 100

WEEL 4 0.38 27.60 68.66 1.67 0.43 0.33 1.31 100

WEMI 21 0.70 19.58 77.34 1.32 0.34 0.39 1.02 100

WHPE 0 0.34 39.67 59.21 0.50 0.13 0.10 0.40 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 12 0.70 26.94 69.57 1.52 0.39 0.41 1.17 100

BAND 11 0.60 40.00 58.34 0.74 0.19 0.15 0.58 100

BLCA 4 0.40 26.36 71.17 1.08 0.28 0.26 0.84 100

CANY 15 0.89 24.89 72.19 1.25 0.32 0.38 0.97 100

CARE 5 0.25 35.22 62.98 0.79 0.20 0.17 0.64 100

GRCA 3 0.25 41.02 57.63 0.59 0.15 0.11 0.49 100

GRSA 0 0.20 85.37 11.40 1.45 0.37 0.27 1.14 100

LAGA 1 0.28 84.29 11.95 1.70 0.44 0.28 1.34 100

MABE 0 0.17 31.73 62.84 2.50 0.64 0.27 2.01 100

MEVE 80 2.35 29.19 66.58 1.81 0.47 0.56 1.40 100

PECO 4 0.39 37.97 57.24 2.17 0.56 0.37 1.70 100

PEFO 1 0.17 93.49 1.65 2.15 0.56 0.44 1.71 100

SAPE 33 0.90 30.42 66.24 1.46 0.38 0.36 1.14 100

WEEL 3 0.31 34.33 61.06 2.06 0.53 0.40 1.61 100

WEMI 11 0.56 24.79 71.32 1.67 0.43 0.50 1.29 100

WHPE 0 0.28 47.62 51.04 0.60 0.15 0.12 0.48 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - 1ppb NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 16 0.98 23.74 72.31 0.94 0.58 0.96 1.49 100

BAND 25 1.02 25.26 70.60 1.05 0.65 0.81 1.64 100

BLCA 11 0.77 27.92 69.72 0.59 0.36 0.47 0.93 100

CANY 23 1.28 34.14 64.05 0.45 0.28 0.34 0.73 100

CARE 11 0.55 88.23 0.97 2.61 1.61 2.49 4.09 100

GRCA 4 0.31 48.24 47.35 1.12 0.69 0.80 1.81 100

GRSA 3 0.31 21.75 73.22 1.27 0.79 0.97 2.00 100

LAGA 8 0.52 41.41 55.20 0.86 0.53 0.65 1.35 100

MABE 0 0.28 21.47 75.12 0.83 0.51 0.74 1.31 100

MEVE 105 2.91 35.46 56.73 1.83 1.13 2.01 2.84 100

PECO 19 0.76 42.63 54.92 0.65 0.40 0.37 1.03 100

PEFO 3 0.25 88.57 6.28 1.34 0.83 0.81 2.17 100

SAPE 52 1.27 27.77 68.06 0.98 0.60 1.06 1.53 100

WEEL 7 0.43 28.04 68.26 0.91 0.56 0.81 1.43 100

WEMI 20 0.81 31.12 54.98 3.41 2.10 3.08 5.31 100

WHPE 6 0.42 38.69 59.22 0.56 0.35 0.29 0.90 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 13 0.82 21.83 75.77 1.03 0.27 0.29 0.81 100

BAND 14 0.75 23.85 73.57 1.14 0.29 0.25 0.89 100

BLCA 10 0.60 24.32 72.29 1.48 0.38 0.39 1.14 100

CANY 17 1.04 23.31 74.91 0.79 0.20 0.16 0.63 100

CARE 7 0.41 26.82 70.11 1.33 0.34 0.35 1.04 100

GRCA 3 0.22 44.62 52.43 1.30 0.34 0.27 1.04 100

GRSA 1 0.23 25.90 72.56 0.71 0.18 0.08 0.56 100

LAGA 4 0.37 37.40 60.40 0.98 0.25 0.22 0.76 100

MABE 0 0.21 19.50 78.49 0.88 0.23 0.21 0.69 100

MEVE 82 2.34 22.52 74.82 1.13 0.29 0.38 0.87 100

PECO 8 0.54 38.31 60.05 0.74 0.19 0.13 0.59 100

PEFO 1 0.19 18.26 79.92 0.82 0.21 0.15 0.64 100

SAPE 30 1.00 21.78 75.69 1.08 0.28 0.33 0.84 100

WEEL 3 0.36 19.69 78.32 0.88 0.23 0.19 0.69 100

WEMI 15 0.58 28.17 69.86 0.85 0.22 0.26 0.65 100

WHPE 3 0.33 34.29 64.29 0.64 0.17 0.10 0.51 100

SNCR (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 11 0.66 27.56 69.41 1.30 0.34 0.37 1.02 100

BAND 11 0.60 29.87 66.90 1.43 0.37 0.32 1.11 100

BLCA 7 0.48 30.25 65.54 1.84 0.47 0.49 1.42 100

CANY 15 0.83 29.47 68.28 0.99 0.26 0.21 0.80 100

CARE 3 0.35 91.39 0.86 3.36 0.87 0.91 2.61 100

GRCA 2 0.19 52.16 44.40 1.52 0.39 0.31 1.22 100

GRSA 1 0.18 48.14 49.05 1.25 0.32 0.26 0.98 100

LAGA 1 0.31 31.22 65.56 1.43 0.37 0.32 1.10 100

MABE 0 0.17 24.92 72.51 1.13 0.29 0.27 0.88 100

MEVE 72 2.01 45.48 47.12 3.14 0.81 1.04 2.41 100

PECO 5 0.46 46.03 51.99 0.89 0.23 0.15 0.71 100

PEFO 1 0.19 18.26 79.92 0.82 0.21 0.15 0.64 100

SAPE 30 1.00 21.78 75.69 1.08 0.28 0.33 0.84 100

WEEL 1 0.29 25.05 72.43 1.12 0.29 0.24 0.88 100

WEMI 8 0.51 38.32 51.54 4.45 1.15 1.11 3.44 100

WHPE 2 0.27 92.32 4.11 1.62 0.42 0.27 1.26 100



















 1 of 12 

PNM San Juan Generating Station 

BART Analysis of Nalco Mobotec NOx Control Technologies 

August 29, 2008 

Introduction 

In the June 18, 2008 meeting between the Public Service Company of New 

Mexico (PNM), Black & Veatch (B&V), and the New Mexico Environment Department 

– Air Quality Bureau (NMED), the NMED requested additional analyses be performed 

for the Nalco Mobotec NOx control technologies. Specifically, the NMED requested 

additional consideration and modeling of the ROFA with Rotamix, Rotamix, and ROFA 

NOx control technologies. 

As described in the June 6, 2007 BART application document and in PNM’s 

March 31, 2008 response to NMED questions, the ROFA technology is a type of overfire 

air (OFA) system, and the Rotamix technology is a version of SNCR control technology. 

The NMED requested that ROFA and Rotamix be analyzed separately from other 

LNB/OFA technology and SNCR, respectively. 

Part 1 - Engineering Impact Analysis 

At the request of the NMED, an engineering impact analysis was performed for 

the Nalco Mobotec NOx control technologies. The results of that impact analysis are 

shown in Attachment 1. Table 7-1 in Attachment 1 is a modification to the Table 7-1 

found in PNM’s original BART submittal of June 6, 2007 and also the update submitted 

on May 30, 2008 to include SNCR. The table has been updated to include the 

engineering impact of the Nalco Mobotec NOx control technologies. In addition to Table 

7-1, Attachment 1 also includes the least cost curves for all NOx control technologies 

evaluated for BART, detailed cost tables for installing Nalco Mobotec NOx control 

technologies, cost development notes providing the basis for the ROFA cost estimates, 

and design concept definitions for each Nalco Mobotec technology. 

In the response submitted to the NMED on March 31, 2008, a technical 

evaluation of the Nalco Mobotec NOx control technologies was performed. The 

evaluation performed forms the basis of the engineering impact analysis for this 

supplemental BART analysis. 

The BART analysis is based on the demonstrated experience of the Nalco 

Mobotec technologies. There is one installation of ROFA in units above 300 MW. This 

installation is for a confidential Northeast client (570 MW). Also, there is one operating 

installation of Rotamix in units above 300 MW; Sutton Station Unit 3 (424 MW). It 

should also be noted that the ROFA and Rotamix applications over 300 MWs both 
 2 of 12 

combust different fuels than SJGS. The Boswell Unit 4 (565 MW) is currently in the 

process of installing Rotamix, but to B&V’s knowledge, the Rotamix system is not in 

operation yet. It should be noted that the application of Rotamix at Sutton produces 

higher emissions (lb/MBtu) than the Nalco Mobotec budgetary quote for PNM. There 

are no units greater than 300 MW in operation with both the ROFA and Rotamix 

technologies. Nalco Mobotec does have units with ROFA and Rotomix technologies 

under the 300 MW size, but these units are significantly smaller than the SJGS units and 

were not considered representative for this discussion. 

In the engineering impact analysis, the cost estimates include contingencies to 

retrofit the ROFA fan to the existing site and the additional auxiliary energy consumption 

of these fans used to impart kinetic energy to the overfire air system to promote turbulent 

mixing during combustion. Due to the large additional amount of kinetic energy required 

for the rotating overfire air system, the auxiliary energy consumed by the ROFA fans is 

significantly higher than the LNB/OFA system currently installed to meet consent decree 

requirements. 

At NMED’s request, the control effectiveness presented in this supplemental 

BART analysis document for the ROFA, Rotamix, and ROFA with Rotamix technologies 

are the values from Nalco Mobotec’s quotation. The ROFA technologies are based on 

operating the furnace at a lower burner stoichiometric ratio (BSR) of 0.84 than the 

currently designed value of 0.90. 

Control Effectiveness of Nalco Mobotec Technologies 

Technology Control Effectiveness (lb/MBtu) 

ROFA with Rotamix 0.20 

Rotamix 0.23 

ROFA 0.26 

Also included in the updated Table 7-1 are the cost effectiveness evaluations 

previously completed and submitted for other NOx control technologies. The cost 

effectiveness values are for additional NOx removal from the consent decree level. As 

stated previously, this analysis of the Nalco Mobotec technologies was done at the 

request of the NMED. B&V and PNM do not agree that Nalco Mobotec’s offerings 

should be differentiated from the other vendors that supply overfire air systems and 

selective non-catalytic reduction systems. 
 3 of 12 

Nalco Mobotec has no specific documented operating experience with the SJGS 

coal. The fuel burned at SJGS is unique. It does not easily fit into either a bituminous or 

sub-bituminous fuel category. 

As previously mentioned, the new low NOx burners, which were installed for the 

consent decree would most likely need to be modified to optimize NOx performance with 

the ROFA technology. On August 15, 2008, B&V had a telephone conversation with 

Nalco Mobotec to better understand how their technology works. In this conversation, 

Nalco Mobotec stated that their technology can be operated at a lower boiler 

stoichiometric ratio, in part, because of the changes that they would likely make to the 

new low NOx burners. The burner modifications will, in effect, detune the new state-ofthe-art B&W low NOx burners to reduce the NOx reduction performance by the burner. 

These changes would consist of physically modifying the burners to improve mixing. 

This work is typically performed by external consultants hired by Nalco Mobotec to redesign the burner systems. Nalco Mobotec states that this improved mixing will reduce 

the potential for corrosion and temperature imbalance. This increase in turbulence and 

mixing at the burner in most cases results in higher flame temperature and more rapid 

combustion close to the burner. The result would be expected to be less unburned carbon 

and less potential for flame impingement on the opposite boiler walls which would 

reduce the potential for fireside waterwall corrosion from overheating and flame 

impingement. Without these modifications, the previously discussed potential impacts of 

operating at this lower BSR may include corrosion due to the reducing environment in 

the boiler and impacts to the steam temperatures due to changing the location of the 

fireball. It should also be noted that even with the burner modifications, B&V continues 

to be concerned about the potential for increased slagging as well as the unproven nature 

of the Nalco Mobotec technology with the SJGS coal and units in this size range. 

The control effectiveness used as the evaluation basis in this supplemental BART 

analysis is dependent on successfully addressing all of these concerns to avoid any 

negative impacts to the SJGS plant operations and availability rate. Meanwhile, other 

NOx control technologies (LNB with OFA) are installed or being installed that have all 

these technical concerns already addressed. 

For Rotamix, there is only one unit with Rotamix above 300 MW. This unit does 

not produce the low level of NOx quoted by Nalco Mobotec for PNM. In comparison, 

Fuel Tech has 17 commercial SNCR only (not in combination with other Fuel Tech 

technologies) installations and 3 demonstration installations on units greater than 300 

MW. Fuel Tech has significantly more experience with SNCR on units in the size range 

of SJGS. Therefore, B&V and PNM have greater confidence in the performance 

guarantee quoted by Fuel Tech. B&V and PNM are not comfortable with the technology 
 4 of 12 

risk that PNM would incur if a permit limit was applied to the SJGS that was based on 

the quote received from Nalco Mobotec. Furthermore, there is not a significant 

difference between the Fuel Tech quotation and the Nalco Mobotec quotation to warrant 

the risk that PNM would incur. 

Lastly, for the combination of ROFA with Rotamix, the lower control 

effectiveness value proposed by Nalco Mobotec in comparison to the LNB/OFA with 

SNCR approach submitted in the May 30, 2008 update is due to the a lower starting 

(uncontrolled) NOx level. With the ROFA technology, uncontrolled NOx for Rotamix is 

0.26 lb/MBtu. While for LNB/OFA, the uncontrolled NOx for SNCR is 0.30 lb/MBtu. 

Both Rotamix and SNCR then reduces NOx by approximately 20% to 0.20 lb/MBtu and 

0.24 lb/MBtu, respectively. Therefore, it is observed that the incremental NOx reduction 

in terms of percentage is very similar between the ROFA with Rotamix and the 

LNB/OFA with SNCR combinations. 

Part 2 – Visibility Analysis 

Subsequent to the June 6, 2007 submittal, PNM further investigated additional 

refinements to the BART CALPUFF air dispersion modeling analyses which included 

nitrate repartitioning and more realistic ammonia background concentrations based on 

monitored values at several western Class I areas. These additional modeling options are 

considered more realistic and therefore will again form the basis of this analysis. 

To date, PNM has previously submitted four BART modeling analyses in addition 

to the Wet ESP analysis being submitted separately but coincident with this analysis. To 

clarify the contents of these analyses, as well as for this submittal, a summary of each has 

been provided: 

June 6, 2007

Modeling analysis were performed to provide SJGS plant-wide regional haze 

(visibility) impacts at 16 Class I areas. The analyses were based on a constant 1 

ppb background ammonia concentration and no nitrate repartitioning. The NOx 

control technologies analyzed were the Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) and 

SNCR/SCR Hybrid. 

November 6, 2007

Modeling analysis were performed to provide SJGS plant-wide regional haze 

(visibility) impacts at 16 Class I areas. The analysis was based on refinements 

which included using the nitrate repartitioning methodology and monthly variable 

background ammonia concentrations. Again, the NOx control technologies 

analyzed were the SCR and SNCR/SCR Hybrid. 
 5 of 12 

March 31, 2008

Two main modeling analyses were performed to provide SJGS plant-wide and 

unit specific regional haze (visibility) impacts at 16 Class I areas for the SCR NOx

control technology only. One of the analyses, believed to be the more 

representative of ammonia chemistry of the area, was based on the November 6, 

2007 refinements which included using the nitrate repartitioning methodology and 

monthly variable background ammonia concentrations. The other analyses 

included nitrate repartitioning and a constant background ammonia concentration 

as requested by the NMED. 

May 30, 2008

Two modeling analyses were performed to provide SJGS plant-wide and unit 

specific regional haze (visibility) impacts at 16 Class I areas for the SNCR NOx 

control technology only. Similar to the March 31, 2008 analyses, one of the 

analyses was based on the November 6, 2007 refinements which included using 

the nitrate repartitioning methodology and monthly variable background ammonia 

concentrations. The other analyses included nitrate repartitioning and a constant 

background ammonia concentration. It should be noted that all vendors of SNCR 

(including Fuel Tech and Nalco Mobotec) have been modeled together as one 

technology called SNCR. This is the same approach that is used for modeling 

SCR control technology, where all vendors are modeled generically as SCR. 

August 29, 2008

Three modeling analyses were performed to provide SJGS plant-wide and unit 

specific regional haze (visibility) impacts at 16 Class I areas for the ROFA with 

Rotamix, Rotamix, and ROFA NOx and WESP PM control technologies (the NOx

and PM analyses were submitted separately). Similar to the May 30, 2008 

analyses, these analyses were also based on the November 6, 2007 refinements 

which included using the nitrate repartitioning methodology and monthly variable 

background ammonia concentrations. 

The modeling refinements contained in this submittal using nitrate repartitioning 

and the variable ammonia background as well as the previous November 2007, March 

2008, and May 30, 2008 submittals supersedes the original June 2007 BART modeling 

analyses as PNM believes these analyses are more representative of regional conditions 

in the modeling domain, as well as, allow for a more representative visibility analysis. 
 6 of 12 

Information pertinent to these two refinements has been included in detail in the previous 

four submittals. Furthermore, at the June 18, 2008 meeting NMED indicated that based 

on a current ammonia monitoring study conducted by Mark E. Sather of EPA Region VI, 

the previous analyses provided utilizing the variable ammonia were representative of the 

surrounding background. Therefore, no other analyses were performed using nitrate 

repartitioning and constant background ammonia. 

Visibility Summary

 Based on the refinements methodology consisting of representative background 

ammonia concentrations and nitrate repartitioning, revised CALPUFF visibility modeling 

was performed for five cases; pre-consent decree, consent decree (which represents 

SJGS’s BART baseline scenario), ROFA with Rotamix, Rotamix, and ROFA NOx

control technology scenarios. The modeling summarized in this report is for the SJGS on 

a plant-wide basis and for each of the four SJGS units on an individual unit basis. It is 

important to note that all other modeling options as described in the BART application 

were unchanged. For simplicity, the following results discuss the differences between the 

consent decree scenario and the NOx control technology scenarios. The stack outlet 

conditions for the NOx control technology scenarios are included in Attachment 2 and the 

visibility modeling results are contained in Attachment 3. 

SJGS Facility Visibility Summary with Nitrate Repartitioning and Variable 

Ammonia

The results of the refined visibility modeling for the SJGS plant, assuming the 

same control technology is installed on all four units, are illustrated in Tables 1 through 6 

of Attachment 3. These tables summarize the scenarios and the maximum visibility 

(deciview) impact seen at any of the 16 Class I areas at any time over the 2001 to 2003 

period. The results of this analysis, using the aforementioned refinements, indicates a 

minimal improvement in visibility impact (less than 0.5 dv) at each of the 16 Class I 

areas when compared to the baseline (consent decree) scenario. 

 The maximum visibility (deciview) improvement seen at any of the 16 Class I 

areas at any time over the 2001 to 2003 period is illustrated in Table 6 for each scenario. 

The expected degree of visibility improvement for each control scenario for each unit (on 

a plant-wide basis) was determined by the difference in the maximum visibility 

improvement for each receptor at each of the sixteen Class I areas. Again, it is important 

to note that the control technology associated with the consent decree formulated the 

SJGS’s baseline case, as well as the baseline case for the individual unit analyses 

described later. Additionally, the cost-effectiveness for the potential BART control 
 7 of 12 

technologies from the BART application were used to calculate visibility improvement 

cost-effectiveness in $/deciview ($/dv). Three major scenarios are shown in the 

visibility improvement cost effectiveness summary in Table 6 for each control 

technology: 

• Pre-consent decree to consent decree. 

• Consent decree to additional NOx control technology alternative scenarios. 

• Pre-consent decree to additional NOx control technology alternative scenarios. 

These maximum visibility improvements between the consent decree and the 

three NOx control technology scenarios range from 0.04 dv to 0.34 dv of expected 

visibility improvement above the consent decree scenario. The visibility improvements 

for each of the Nalco Mobotec control technology options are summarized below: 

• Facility improvements with ROFA/Rotamix range from 0.09 dv to 0.34 dv. 

• Facility improvements with Rotamix range from 0.09 dv to 0.25 dv. 

• Facility improvements with ROFA range from 0.04 dv to 0.21 dv. 

The results indicate that adding additional NOx control technology beyond the 

consent decree does not yield visibility improvement greater than 0.5 dv at any Class I 

area. In fact, as previously noted, the maximum visibility improvement at any of the 16 

class I areas is only 0.34 dv. 

Based on the visibility improvement modeled and the total annual cost evaluated 

in the impact analysis stage of the BART application document, the cost-effectiveness for 

visibility improvement (annual cost per improvement in visibility, $/dv), was determined 

for SJGS over the aforementioned range of visibility improvement. The resulting cost for 

installation of Nalco Mobotec NOx control technology for all four units ranges from $464 

million/dv to $69 million/dv. The visibility improvements for each of the Nalco 

Mobotec control technology options are summarized below: 

• ROFA/Rotamix range from $369 million/dv to $97 million/dv. 

• Rotamix range from $269 million/dv to $69 million/dv. 

• ROFA range from $464 million/dv to $82 million/dv. 

Attachment 3 contains a SJGS plant-wide summary of the 98th percentile visibility 

impact for the three modeled technology scenarios (i.e., Pre-Consent Decree, Consent 
 8 of 12 

Decree, ROFA/Rotamix, Rotamix, and ROFA scenarios), provides information on the 

number of days above 0.5 dv threshold, and indicates the contribution of each 

pollutant associated with the 98th percentile visibility impact for each class I area. 

Unit Specific Visibility Summary with Nitrate Repartitioning and Variable 

Ammonia

The results of the refined visibility modeling for Unit 1, Unit 2, Unit 3, and Unit 4 

are illustrated in Tables 7-12, 13-18, 19-24, and 25-30 of Attachment 3, respectively. 

These tables summarize the scenarios and the maximum visibility (deciview) impact seen 

at any of the 16 Class I areas at any time over the 2001 to 2003 period. Similar to results 

seen for the SJGS facility, the visibility impacts at Mesa Verde, in many cases, represent 

the maximum visibility impact at any of the 16 Class I areas. In addition, this analysis 

indicates a minimal improvement in visibility impact (less than 0.5 dv) at each of the 16 

Class I areas when compared to the baseline (consent decree) scenario. 

The maximum visibility (deciview) improvement seen at any of the 16 Class I 

areas at any time over the 2001 to 2003 period is illustrated in Tables 12, 18, 24, and 30. 

Again, the expected degree of visibility improvement for each control scenario for each 

unit was determined by the difference between the consent decree’s maximum visibility 

improvement for each receptor at each of the sixteen Class I areas and the specific NOx

control technology scenario’s maximum visibility improvement for each receptor at each 

of the sixteen Class areas. Furthermore, the same methodology previously described for 

the SJGS’s cost-effectiveness in ($/dv) was used here for each unit. 

These maximum visibility improvements between the consent decree and the NOx

control scenario for each unit are similar to that of the combined SJGS. The visibility 

improvements for each scenario are summarized below. 

ROFA/Rotamix

• Unit 1 improvements range from 0.02 dv to 0.23 dv. 

• Unit 2 improvements range from 0.02 dv to 0.23 dv 

• Unit 3 improvements range from 0.05 dv to 0.24 dv 

• Unit 4 improvements range from 0.04 dv to 0.24 dv 

Rotamix

• Unit 1 improvements range from 0.02 dv to 0.17 dv. 

• Unit 2 improvements range from 0.02 dv to 0.18 dv 

• Unit 3 improvements range from 0.02 dv to 0.17 dv 

• Unit 4 improvements range from 0.03 dv to 0.18 dv 
 9 of 12 

ROFA

• Unit 1 improvements range from 0.01 dv to 0.11 dv. 

• Unit 2 improvements range from 0.01 dv to 0.12 dv 

• Unit 3 improvements range from 0.0 dv to 0.12 dv 

• Unit 4 improvements range from 0.01 dv to 0.12 dv 

The results again indicate that adding additional NOx control technology beyond 

the consent decree consisting of ROFA/Rotamix, Rotamix, or ROFA does not yield 

visibility improvement greater than 0.5 dv at any Class I area. Based on the visibility 

improvement modeled and the total annual cost evaluated in the impact analysis stage of 

the BART application document, the cost-effectiveness for visibility improvement 

(annual cost per improvement in visibility, $/dv), was determined for each unit for each 

Class I area. The resulting cost for installation of additional control technology for each 

unit is summarized below. 

ROFA/Rotamix

• Unit 1 cost range is $322 million/dv to $33 million/dv. 

• Unit 2 cost range is $308 million/dv to $29 million/dv. 

• Unit 3 cost range is $209 million/dv to $41 million/dv. 

• Unit 4 cost range is $224 million/dv to $40 million/dv. 

Rotamix

• Unit 1 cost range is $197 million/dv to $21 million/dv. 

• Unit 2 cost range is $187 million/dv to $20 million/dv. 

• Unit 3 cost range is $214 million/dv to $28 million/dv. 

• Unit 4 cost range is $176 million/dv to $27 million/dv. 

ROFA

• Unit 1 cost range is $432 million/dv to $30 million/dv. 

• Unit 2 cost range is $384 million/dv to $29 million/dv. 

• Unit 3 cost range is $1,281 million/dv1 to $43 million/dv. 

• Unit 4 cost range is $512 million/dv to $42 million/dv. 

 

1

 The visibility improvement realized for Unit 3 is 0.004 dv but is illustrated in Attachment 3, Table 24 as 

0.00 dv. 
 10 of 12 

Attachment 3 also includes a unit specific summary of the 98th percentile 

visibility impact for the three modeled technology scenarios (i.e., Pre-Consent Decree, 

Consent Decree, ROFA/Rotamix, Rotamix, and ROFA scenarios), includes the number 

of days above 0.5 dv threshold, and indicates the contribution of each pollutant associated 

with the 98th percentile visibility impact for each class I area. 

Additional Considerations

The minimal visibility improvements discussed in this document for the variable 

ammonia case do not merit the large capital expenditure required to install 

ROFA/Rotamix, Rotamix, or ROFA NOx control technology. In addition to the high cost 

and minimal visibility improvements associated with these technologies, there are other 

important reasons that LNB, OFA and NN should be considered BART for the SJGS 

units. First, the LNB, OFA and NN systems are being installed to meet the consent 

decree are state-of-the-art combustion controls. State-of-the-art combustion controls 

comprising of LNB, OFA and NN technologies were used to form the basis for the 

BART presumptive limits for NOx in the BART guidelines. Second, the ROFA NOx

control technology is a LNB/OFA technology in which SJGS already has installed or will 

soon be in the process of installing on their four generating units. Third, the visibility 

results imply that visibility is influenced more by the SJGS’s sulfur emissions than by the 

reduction of NOx. However, sulfur emissions are not subject to BART requirements 

because New Mexico participates in the WRAP emissions trading program. 

Fourth, installation of SNCR, ROFA/Rotamix or Rotamix requires ammonia to 

reduce NOx emissions. Specifically, in a SNCR system, urea is injected into the boiler 

and this will decompose into ammonia for the NOx reduction process. Any unreacted 

ammonia passes through the boiler and out the stack as ammonia emissions or ammonia 

slip. This additional ammonia would then be available to add to the ammonia 

background concentration, chemically react to form nitrates and sulfates, and potentially 

further increase the visibility impacts at the Class I areas. The additional ammonia slip 

was not considered in this analysis. 

 Fifth, as described in Part 1, the Nalco Mobotec ROFA or ROFA/Rotamix 

system requires detuning of the new LNB systems coincident with the installation of the 

ROFA system. This causes a potential negative scenario if a forced outage occurs with 

the ROFA fan system. Without the ROFA fan to complete the combustion process, the 

detuned LNB, which has significantly higher NOx emissions than the tuned LNB, will 

quite likely result in a forced outage of the unit to avoid exceedance of the NOx

emissions limit. This results in lost generation for PNM. This scenario may be avoided 
 11 of 12 

in a LNB/OFA system since the increase in NOx emissions when the OFA system is out 

of service will be minimal when compared to the ROFA system. 

Finally, PNM entered into a consent decree with the Grand Canyon Trust, Sierra 

Club, and NMED on March 10, 2005, to settle alleged violations of the Clean Air Act. 

For NOx control, the settlement required installation of state-of-the-art NOx combustion 

controls which was deemed to be new LNB with OFA and a NN system. All four units 

will have these controls installed by the spring of 2009. Due to the nature of the consent 

decree requiring the approval of and installation of state-of-the-art combustion controls to 

achieve a specific NOx emission limit, detuning of this LNB system to increase NOx

emissions as part of the ROFA or ROFA/Rotamix may be prohibited without additional 

legal action. At a minimum, all parties identified in the consent decree may have to agree 

to the proposed modification should ROFA or ROFA/Rotamix be determined by NMED 

to be BART. 

Conclusion

As noted in this document, PNM’s further investigation of additional refinements 

to the June 2007 BART CALPUFF air dispersion modeling analyses to yield more 

realistic regional haze impacts was warranted. These analyses included nitrate 

repartitioning and more realistic ammonia background concentrations based on 

monitored values at several western Class I areas, as well as, the additional ammonia 

study being conducted by EPA in New Mexico. The conclusion of this study re-iterates 

and further supports the overall findings of the original June 2007, as well as, the three 

aforementioned additional submittals, that installation of additional NOx control 

technology systems at the SJGS provide minimal visibility improvements and would 

require significant capital expenditure and modifications that will impact many areas of 

the plant including boiler draft systems, air heater performance, and ash handling. The 

results from the analyses further substantiate that the addition of ROFA/Rotamix, 

Rotamix, or ROFA NOx control technology does not yield a benefit nor meet the 

intended goal of BART. Specifically, these analyses indicate: 

• The addition of ROFA/Rotamix, Rotamix, or ROFA NOx control technology on a 

plant-wide or individual unit basis shows less than a 0.5 dv improvement for all 

Class I areas including the four Class I areas located in New Mexico. 

• Both the total annual costs evaluated and the cost-effectiveness ($/dv) are 

prohibitive given the minimal improvements realized. 

• Although B&V has received additional clarifications from Nalco Mobotec on the 

ROFA technology, B&V and PNM continue to have concerns about the potential 
 12 of 12 

for slag using the ROFA system, Nalco Mobotec’s lack of experience with the 

fuel burned at SJGS, and Nalco Mobotec’s minimal experience with units of a 

similar size to SJGS. 

Therefore, as previously noted, given the minimal visibility improvement to the 

Class I areas in the BART analysis, the recommended NOx BART control for SJGS is 

LNB, OFA, and a NN. 
Attachment 1 
PNM BART Additional NOx Technology Control Strategy Review

Last Updated: 8

Total Total

Emission Expected Expected Expected Capital Annualized Incremental

Performance Emission Emission Emission Investment Cost Cost Cost Energy N

Level Rate Rate Reduction (TCI) (TAC) Effectiveness Effectiveness Impacts Im

All Feasible Technologies (lb/MBtu) (lb/h) (ton/yr) (ton/yr) (1,000$) (1,000$) ($/ton) ($/ton) (1,000$) (1

SJGS Unit 1

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) 0.07 259.5 966 3,174 156,805 20,525 6,466 2,844 1,496 SNCR/SCR Hybrid 0.18 667.3 2,484 1,656 104,436 16,207 9,786 34,218 706 1ROFA & Rotamix 0.20 741.4 2,760 1,380 29,350 6,762 4,900 7,765 1,413 

Rotamix 0.23 852.6 3,174 966 11,306 3,547 3,672 1,210 51 SNCR 0.24 889.7 3,312 828 15,321 3,380 4,082 -272 36 ROFA 0.26 963.8 3,588 552 18,293 3,455 6,259 -- 1,363 

SJGS Unit 2

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) 0.07 258.2 961 3,158 169,251 21,891 6,932 3,457 1,492 SNCR/SCR Hybrid 0.18 663.8 2,471 1,648 108,628 16,670 10,117 36,080 346 1ROFA & Rotamix 0.20 737.6 2,746 1,373 29,350 6,762 4,925 7,805 1,413 

Rotamix 0.23 848.2 3,158 961 11,306 3,547 3,690 1,216 51 SNCR 0.24 885.1 3,295 824 15,321 3,380 4,103 -273 36 ROFA 0.26 958.9 3,570 549 18,293 3,455 6,291 -- 1,363 

SJGS Unit 3

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) 0.07 403.1 1,501 4,931 215,568 28,359 5,752 1,167 2,194 SNCR/SCR Hybrid 0.18 1,036.4 3,859 2,572 168,507 25,606 9,954 37,221 507 2ROFA & Rotamix 0.20 1,151.6 4,287 2,144 34,070 9,648 4,501 7,338 2,810 

Rotamix 0.23 1,324.3 4,931 1,501 13,316 4,929 3,285 1,553 84 SNCR 0.24 1,381.9 5,145 1,286 18,977 4,596 3,573 -1,232 36 ROFA 0.26 1,497.1 5,574 857 20,983 5,124 5,976 -- 2,725 

SJGS Unit 4

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) 0.07 395.4 1,472 4,837 199,558 26,592 5,497 753 2,215 SNCR/SCR Hybrid 0.18 1,016.8 3,786 2,524 161,572 24,849 9,846 36,139 507 2ROFA & Rotamix 0.20 1,129.8 4,206 2,103 34,070 9,648 4,587 7,479 2,810 

Rotamix 0.23 1,299.3 4,837 1,472 13,316 4,929 3,348 1,583 84 SNCR 0.24 1,355.8 5,047 1,262 18,977 4,596 3,642 -1,255 36 ROFA 0.26 1,468.7 5,468 841 20,983 5,124 6,091 -- 2,725 

Notes:1. All costs are in 2007$.2. Expected emission rates (ton/yr) calculations were based on 85 percent unit capacity factor (referer to Appendix A Design Basis).3. Expected emission reduction (ton/yr) calculations were based on the consent decree upgrades control effectiveness as shown in Table 4-1.4. TCI and TAC are referenced from Appendix C Cost Analysis Summary.5. Cost-effectiveness ($/ton) is defined as ratio of TAC over Expected Emission Reduction (ton/yr).6. Expected emission reduction is based on annual emission reduction from consent decree upgrade emission levels (Table 4-1).7. Incremental cost effectiveness are based on increments in expected emission reduction (ton/yr)

Table 7-1

Impact Analysis and Cost Effectiveness Results of Additional NOx Control Technologies for SJGS
SJGS 1 NOx Technology Least Cost Curve

0

2,5005,0007,500

10,00012,50015,00017,50020,00022,50025,000

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 

Expected Emissions Reduction (ton/yr)

Total Annualized Cost (1,000$/yr)

SNCR/SCR Hybrid Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) Dominant ContrSNCR ROFA RotamixROFA & Rotamix
SJGS 2 NOx Technology Least Cost Curve

0

2,5005,0007,500

10,00012,50015,00017,50020,00022,50025,000

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 

Expected Emissions Reduction (ton/yr)

Total Annualized Cost (1,000$/yr)

SNCR/SCR Hybrid Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) Dominant ControlsSNCR ROFA RotamixROFA & Rotamix
SJGS 3 NOx Technology Least Cost Curve

0

3,0006,0009,000

12,00015,00018,00021,00024,00027,00030,000

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 

Expected Emissions Reduction (ton/yr)

Total Annualized Cost (1,000$/yr)

SNCR/SCR Hybrid Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) Dominant ControlsSNCR ROFA RotamixROFA & Rotamix
SJGS 4 NOx Technology Least Cost Curve

0

3,0006,0009,000

12,00015,00018,00021,00024,00027,00030,000

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 

Expected Emissions Reduction (ton/yr)

Total Annualized Cost (1,000$/yr)

SNCR/SCR Hybrid Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) Dominant ControlsSNCR ROFA RotamixROFA & Rotamix
Design Concept Definition 

Site Name San Juan Generating Station Units 1, 2, 3, 4 

Client Name PNM Process Technology Nalco Mobotec ROFA 

Process Description Nalco Mobotec ROFA technology utilizing rotating, boosted overfire air system with combustion system (burner) modifications. 

 Pollutant NOx (Unit 1) NOx (Unit 2) NOx (Unit 3) NOx (Unit 4) 

 Emissions 

 lb/MBtu 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 

 lb/h 1,112 1,106 1,727 1,695 

 Controlled Emissions 

 lb/MBtu (BSR* = 0.84) 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 

 lb/h (BSR* = 0.84) 964 959 1,497 1,469 

Inlet Flow Basis, acfm 2,082,166 2,082,819 3,205,572 3,144,890 

Pressure Drop Added, in. wg NA 

Coal Source and Type New Mexico, Subbituminous 

 Capacity Factor 85.0% 

Consumables Reagent, lb/h NA NA NA NA 

 Energy, kW 3,000 3,000 6,000 6,000 

Maintenance Similar maintenance effort as other combustion control technologies. 

Byproduct Description CO and LOI levels to be monitored. 

 Other None. 

Location of Major Process Equipment Install ROFA ports above existing close coupled overfire air ports. Overfire air ports will be 

plugged up and new refractory installed. ROFA booster fans and new air ductwork to ROFA 

ports will be installed. Modifications to burners as recommended by manufacturer. 

Inlet/Outlet Connections and Interconnecting Ducts Tie-in existing air duct with ROFA booster fans. 

Reagent Storage None. 

Control System Modifications Incorporated into existing control system. 

Fan Modifications New ROFA booster fans. 

Power Supply/Aux Power Modifications New transformer and aux electric system upgrade will be required for the new ROFA booster 

fans. 

Enclosures Requirements None. 

Demolition or Relocation Requirements Penetrations into boiler wall and as necessary for new air ductwork to ROFA ports. 

Major Constructability Issues Constructing ROFA booster fans in congested plant site layout. 

Significant Issues or Challenges Aux electric system upgrade for new ROFA booster fans and monitoring CO and LOI levels 

during combustion. Modifications to burners to complement ROFA system operations. 

Other Assumptions: 

• No major impact in plant availability. 

• The site has sufficient area available to accommodate construction activities including, but not limited to, offices, laydown, and staging. 

• Boiler/duct penetrations included. 

• Minimal impact on potential ash sales. 

* BSR – Burner Stoichiometric Ratio 

State of Availability Available. 

State of Applicability Applicable. 

Technical Feasibility ROFA is technically feasible as a variant of the Overfire Air (OFA) system. 
Design Concept Definition 

Site Name San Juan Generating Station Units 1, 2, 3, 4 

Client Name PNM Process Technology Nalco Mobotec Rotamix 

Process Description Nalco Mobotec Rotamix utilizing urea reagent addition into boiler upper-level zones. 

 Pollutant NOx (Unit 1) NOx (Unit 2) NOx (Unit 3) NOx (Unit 4) 

 Emissions 

 lb/MBtu 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 

 lb/h 1,112 1,106 1,727 1,695 

 Controlled Emissions 

 lb/MBtu 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 

 lb/h 853 848 1,324 1,299 

Inlet Flow Basis, acfm 2,082,166 2,082,819 3,205,572 3,144,890 

Pressure Drop Added, in. wg NA 

Coal Source and Type New Mexico, Subbituminous 

 Capacity Factor 85.0% 

Consumables Reagent (urea), lb/h 1,313 1,313 2,062 2,062 

 Water, gpm 24 24 37 37 

 Energy, kW 112 112 186 186 

Maintenance 3% of direct material cost. 

Byproduct Description No impact on ash sales. 

Other 5ppm ammonia slip. 

Location of Major Process Equipment Install Rotamix injection nozzles above existing close coupled overfire air ports. 

Injection skid and reagent tank at grade with truck unloading station. 

Inlet/Outlet Connections and Interconnecting Ducts Tie-in to existing air duct for Rotamix fans. 

Reagent Storage 250,000 gallon tank at grade (estimated for 7 days storage). 

Control System Modifications Incorporated into existing control system. 

Fan Modifications New Rotamix fans for reagent system. 

Power Supply/Aux Power Modifications Minimum impact/modifications. 

Enclosures Requirements Enclosed in existing boiler building. 

Demolition or Relocation Requirements Penetrations into boiler wall. 

Major Constructability Issues None. 

Significant Issues or Challenges Ammonia slip may cause buildup of ammonium bisulfate on the air heater, which may require 

more frequent cleaning. Up to 5 ppm ammonia slip. 

Other Assumptions: 

• No major impact in plant availability. 

• The site has sufficient area available to accommodate construction activities including, but not limited to, offices, laydown, and staging. 

• Boiler/duct penetrations included. 

• Minimal impact on potential ash sales. 

State of Availability Available. 

State of Applicability Applicable, as an alternate vendor for SNCR. 

Technical Feasibility Rotamix is technically feasible as a variant of the SNCR system. 
Design Concept Definition 

Site Name San Juan Generating Station Units 1, 2, 3, 4 

Client Name PNM Process Technology Nalco Mobotec ROFA with ROTAMIX 

Process Description Nalco Mobotec ROFA with ROTAMIX utilizing urea reagent injection into turbulent boiler upper-level zones. 

 Pollutant NOx (Unit 1) NOx (Unit 2) NOx (Unit 3) NOx (Unit 4) 

 Emissions 

 lb/MBtu 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 

 lb/h 1,112 1,106 1,727 1,695 

 Controlled Emissions 

 lb/MBtu 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 

 lb/h 741 738 1,152 1,130 

Inlet Flow Basis, acfm 2,082,166 2,082,819 3,205,572 3,144,890 

Pressure Drop Added, in. wg NA 

Coal Source and Type New Mexico, Subbituminous 

 Capacity Factor 85.0% 

Consumables Reagent (urea), lb/h 1,142 1,142 1,741 1,741 

 Water, gpm 21 21 32 32 

 Energy, kW 3,112 3,112 6,186 6,186 

Maintenance 3% of direct material cost. 

Byproduct Description No impact on ash sales. 

Other 5ppm ammonia slip (if ROTAMIX). 

Location of Major Process Equipment Install ROFA ports above existing close coupled overfire air ports. Install Rotamix injection 

nozzles above existing close coupled overfire air ports. Injection skid and reagent tank at grade 

with truck unloading station. 

Inlet/Outlet Connections and Interconnecting Ducts Tie-in to existing air duct. 

Reagent Storage 250,000 gallon tank at grade (estimated for 7 days storage). 

Control System Modifications Incorporated into existing control system. 

Fan Modifications New ROFA booster fans. 

Power Supply/Aux Power Modifications New transformer and aux electric system upgrade will be required for the new ROFA booster 

fans. 

Enclosures Requirements Enclosed in existing boiler building. 

Demolition or Relocation Requirements Penetrations into boiler wall. 

Major Constructability Issues Constructing ROFA booster fans in congested plant site layout. 

Significant Issues or Challenges Ammonia slip may cause buildup of ammonium bisulfate on the air heater, which may require 

more frequent cleaning. Up to 5 ppm ammonia slip. Modifications to burners to complement 

ROFA system operations. 

Other Assumptions: 

• No major impact in plant availability. 

• The site has sufficient area available to accommodate construction activities including, but not limited to, offices, laydown, and staging. 

• Boiler/duct penetrations included. 

• Minimal impact on potential ash sales. 

State of Availability Available. 

State of Applicability Applicable. 

Technical Feasibility See technical feasibility of independent ROFA and Rotamix application. 
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Technology: ROFA - Unit 1 Date: 8/15/2008

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

ROFA system scope: $6,681,000 Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

ROFA fan

ROFA ports with boiler tube bends

ROFA ductwork

Instrumentation for ROFA

Contingency for combustion system modifications $125,000 Estimated cost based on 8/15/08 phone call with Nalco Mobotec

NOx monitoring system $220,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes

Electrical system upgrades $1,159,000 New transformer and electrical upgrades for new ROFA booster fans

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $8,185,000

Gross Receipt Tax $506,447 (CC) X 6.2%

Freight $409,250 (CC) X 5.0%

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $9,101,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $252,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes

Handling & erection $1,843,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes

Electrical $435,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes

Piping included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Insulation included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Painting included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Demolition $301,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes

Relocation $455,000 (PEC) X 5.0%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $3,286,000

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $12,387,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $1,239,000 (DC) X 10.0%

Owner's cost $619,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Construction management $619,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Start-up and spare parts $248,000 (DC) X 2.0%

Performance test $50,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate

Contingencies $2,477,000 (DC) X 20.0%

Total indirect costs (IC) $5,252,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $654,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $18,293,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Maintenance labor and materials $310,000 (DC) X 2.5%

Total fixed annual costs $310,000

Variable annual costs

Auxiliary and ID fan power $1,363,000 3000 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Nalco Mobotec prop.

Total variable annual costs $1,363,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $1,673,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $1,782,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $1,782,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $3,455,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Technology: ROFA - Unit 2 Date: 8/15/2008

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

ROFA system scope: $6,681,000 Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

ROFA fan

ROFA ports with boiler tube bends

ROFA ductwork

Instrumentation for ROFA

Contingency for combustion system modifications $125,000 Estimated cost based on 8/15/08 phone call with Nalco Mobotec

NOx monitoring system $220,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes

Electrical system upgrades $1,159,000 New transformer and electrical upgrades for new ROFA booster fans

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $8,185,000

Gross Receipt Tax $506,447 (CC) X 6.2%

Freight $409,250 (CC) X 5.0%

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $9,101,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $252,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes

Handling & erection $1,843,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes

Electrical $435,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes

Piping included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Insulation included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Painting included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Demolition $301,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes

Relocation $455,000 (PEC) X 5.0%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $3,286,000

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $12,387,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $1,239,000 (DC) X 10.0%

Owner's cost $619,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Construction management $619,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Start-up and spare parts $248,000 (DC) X 2.0%

Performance test $50,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate

Contingencies $2,477,000 (DC) X 20.0%

Total indirect costs (IC) $5,252,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $654,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $18,293,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Maintenance labor and materials $310,000 (DC) X 2.5%

Total fixed annual costs $310,000

Variable annual costs

Auxiliary and ID fan power $1,363,000 3000 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Nalco Mobotec prop.

Total variable annual costs $1,363,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $1,673,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $1,782,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $1,782,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $3,455,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Technology: ROFA - Unit 3 Date: 8/15/2008

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

ROFA system scope: $7,651,000 Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

ROFA fan

ROFA ports with boiler tube bends

ROFA ductwork

Instrumentation for ROFA

Contingency for combustion system modifications $125,000 Estimated cost based on 8/15/08 phone call with Nalco Mobotec

NOx monitoring system $220,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes

Electrical system upgrades $1,214,000 New transformer and electrical upgrades for new ROFA booster fans

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $9,210,000

Gross Receipt Tax $569,869 (CC) X 6.2%

Freight $460,500 (CC) X 5.0%

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $10,240,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $328,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes

Handling & erection $2,152,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes

Electrical $585,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes

Piping included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Insulation included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Painting included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Demolition $396,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes

Relocation $512,000 (PEC) X 5.0%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $3,973,000

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $14,213,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $1,421,000 (DC) X 10.0%

Owner's cost $711,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Construction management $711,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Start-up and spare parts $284,000 (DC) X 2.0%

Performance test $50,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate

Contingencies $2,843,000 (DC) X 20.0%

Total indirect costs (IC) $6,020,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $750,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $20,983,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Maintenance labor and materials $355,000 (DC) X 2.5%

Total fixed annual costs $355,000

Variable annual costs

Auxiliary and ID fan power $2,725,000 6000 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Nalco-Mobotec prop.

Total variable annual costs $2,725,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $3,080,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $2,044,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $2,044,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $5,124,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Technology: ROFA - Unit 4 Date: 8/15/2008

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

ROFA system scope: $7,651,000 Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

ROFA fan

ROFA ports with boiler tube bends

ROFA ductwork

Instrumentation for ROFA

Contingency for combustion system modifications $125,000 Estimated cost based on 8/15/08 phone call with Nalco Mobotec

NOx monitoring system $220,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes

Electrical system upgrades $1,214,000 New transformer and electrical upgrades for new ROFA booster fans

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $9,210,000

Gross Receipt Tax $569,869 (CC) X 6.2%

Freight $460,500 (CC) X 5.0%

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $10,240,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $328,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes

Handling & erection $2,152,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes

Electrical $585,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes

Piping included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Insulation included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Painting included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Demolition $396,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes

Relocation $512,000 (PEC) X 5.0%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $3,973,000

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $14,213,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $1,421,000 (DC) X 10.0%

Owner's cost $711,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Construction management $711,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Start-up and spare parts $284,000 (DC) X 2.0%

Performance test $50,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate

Contingencies $2,843,000 (DC) X 20.0%

Total indirect costs (IC) $6,020,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $750,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $20,983,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Maintenance labor and materials $355,000 (DC) X 2.5%

Total fixed annual costs $355,000

Variable annual costs

Auxiliary and ID fan power $2,725,000 6000 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Nalco-Mobotec prop.

Total variable annual costs $2,725,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $3,080,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $2,044,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $2,044,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $5,124,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Technology: Rotamix - SJGS Unit 1 Date: 8/15/2008

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

Rotamix system scope: $2,101,000 Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Rotamix fan

Rotamix ports with boiler tube bends

Reagent and water storage tanks

Reagent, water pump skids

Rotamix injection lances

Instrumentation for Rotamix

NOx monitoring system $220,000 B&V cost estimate - not included in Nalco-Mobotec proposal

Electrical system upgrades $189,000 B&V cost estimate - for reagent preparation, injection systems

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $2,510,000

Gross Receipt Tax $155,306 (CC) X 6.2%

Freight $125,500 (CC) X 5.0%

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $2,791,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $567,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Handling & erection $1,702,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Electrical $567,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Piping included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Insulation included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Painting included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Demolition $284,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Relocation $113,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $3,233,000

Air preheater modifications $1,071,000 B&V cost estimate

Site preparation $0 N/A

Buildings $0 N/A

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $7,095,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $708,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Owner's cost $355,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Construction management $1,012,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Start-up and spare parts $213,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Performance test $100,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate

Contingencies $1,419,000 (DC) X 20.0%

Total indirect costs (IC) $3,807,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $404,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $11,306,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated level

Maintenance labor and materials $213,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $338,000

Variable annual costs

Reagent $2,053,000 1,313 lb/hr and 420 $/ton Nalco Mobotec prop.

Auxiliary and ID fan power $51,000 112 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Nalco Mobotec prop.

Water $4,000 24 gpm and 0.33 $/kgal Nalco Mobotec prop.

Total variable annual costs $2,108,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $2,446,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $1,101,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $1,101,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $3,547,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Technology: Rotamix - SJGS Unit 2 Date: 8/15/2008

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

Rotamix system scope: $2,101,000 Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Rotamix fan

Rotamix ports with boiler tube bends

Reagent and water storage tanks

Reagent, water pump skids

Rotamix injection lances

Instrumentation for Rotamix

NOx monitoring system $220,000 B&V cost estimate - not included in Nalco-Mobotec proposal

Electrical system upgrades $189,000 B&V cost estimate - for reagent preparation, injection systems

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $2,510,000

Gross Receipt Tax $155,306 (CC) X 6.2%

Freight $125,500 (CC) X 5.0%

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $2,791,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $567,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Handling & erection $1,702,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Electrical $567,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Piping included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Insulation included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Painting included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Demolition $284,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Relocation $113,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $3,233,000

Air preheater modifications $1,071,000 B&V cost estimate

Site preparation $0 N/A

Buildings $0 N/A

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $7,095,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $708,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Owner's cost $355,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Construction management $1,012,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Start-up and spare parts $213,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Performance test $100,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate

Contingencies $1,419,000 (DC) X 20.0%

Total indirect costs (IC) $3,807,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $404,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $11,306,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated level

Maintenance labor and materials $213,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $338,000

Variable annual costs

Reagent $2,053,000 1,313 lb/hr and 420 $/ton Nalco Mobotec prop.

Auxiliary and ID fan power $51,000 112 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Nalco Mobotec prop.

Water $4,000 24 gpm and 0.33 $/kgal Nalco Mobotec prop.

Total variable annual costs $2,108,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $2,446,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $1,101,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $1,101,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $3,547,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Technology: Rotamix - SJGS Unit 3 Date: 8/15/2008

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

Rotamix system scope: $2,337,000 Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Rotamix fan

Rotamix ports with boiler tube bends

Reagent and water storage tanks

Reagent, water pump skids

Rotamix injection lances

Instrumentation for Rotamix

NOx monitoring system $220,000 B&V cost estimate - not included in Nalco-Mobotec proposal

Electrical system upgrades $242,000 B&V cost estimate - for reagent preparation, injection systems

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $2,799,000

Gross Receipt Tax $173,188 (CC) X 6.2%

Freight $139,950 (CC) X 5.0%

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $3,112,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $720,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Handling & erection $2,159,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Electrical $720,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Piping included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Insulation included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Painting included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Demolition $360,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Relocation $144,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $4,103,000

Air preheater modifications $1,071,000 B&V cost estimate

Site preparation $0 N/A

Buildings $0 N/A

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $8,286,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $879,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Owner's cost $414,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Construction management $1,255,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Start-up and spare parts $249,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Performance test $100,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate

Contingencies $1,657,000 (DC) X 20.0%

Total indirect costs (IC) $4,554,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $476,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $13,316,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated level

Maintenance labor and materials $249,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $374,000

Variable annual costs

Reagent $3,169,000 2,026 lb/hr and 420 $/ton Nalco Mobotec prop.

Auxiliary and ID fan power $84,000 186 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Nalco Mobotec prop.

Water $5,000 37 gpm and 0.33 $/1,000 ga Nalco Mobotec prop.

Total variable annual costs $3,258,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $3,632,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $1,297,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $1,297,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $4,929,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Technology: Rotamix - SJGS Unit 4 Date: 8/15/2008

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

Rotamix system scope: $2,337,000 Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Rotamix fan

Rotamix ports with boiler tube bends

Reagent and water storage tanks

Reagent, water pump skids

Rotamix injection lances

Instrumentation for Rotamix

NOx monitoring system $220,000 B&V cost estimate - not included in Nalco-Mobotec proposal

Electrical system upgrades $242,000 B&V cost estimate - for reagent preparation, injection systems

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $2,799,000

Gross Receipt Tax $173,188 (CC) X 6.2%

Freight $139,950 (CC) X 5.0%

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $3,112,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $720,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Handling & erection $2,159,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Electrical $720,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Piping included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Insulation included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Painting included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Demolition $360,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Relocation $144,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $4,103,000

Air preheater modifications $1,071,000 B&V cost estimate

Site preparation $0 N/A

Buildings $0 N/A

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $8,286,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $879,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Owner's cost $414,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Construction management $1,255,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08

Start-up and spare parts $249,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Performance test $100,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate

Contingencies $1,657,000 (DC) X 20.0%

Total indirect costs (IC) $4,554,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $476,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $13,316,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated level

Maintenance labor and materials $249,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $374,000

Variable annual costs

Reagent $3,169,000 2,026 lb/hr and 420 $/ton Nalco Mobotec prop.

Auxiliary and ID fan power $84,000 186 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Nalco Mobotec prop.

Water $5,000 37 gpm and 0.33 $/1,000 ga Nalco Mobotec prop.

Total variable annual costs $3,258,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $3,632,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $1,297,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $1,297,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $4,929,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Technology: ROFA & Rotamix - SJGS Unit 1 Date: 8/15/2008

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

ROFA-Rotamix system scope: $8,782,000 Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

ROFA fan

ROFA ports with boiler tube bends

ROFA ductwork

Instrumentation for ROFA

Rotamix fan

Rotamix ports with boiler tube bends

Reagent and water storage tanks

Reagent, water pump skids

Rotamix injection lances

Instrumentation for Rotamix

Contingency for combustion system modifications $125,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

NOx monitoring system $220,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Electrical system upgrades $1,348,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $10,475,000

Gross Receipt Tax $648,141 (CC) X 6.2%

Freight $523,750 (CC) X 5.0%

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $11,647,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $819,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Handling & erection $3,545,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Electrical $1,002,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Piping included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Insulation included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Painting included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Demolition $585,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Relocation $568,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $6,519,000

Air preheater modifications $1,071,000 B&V cost estimate

Site preparation $0 N/A

Buildings $0 N/A

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $19,237,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $1,947,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Owner's cost $962,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Construction management $1,631,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Start-up and spare parts $577,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Performance test $100,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate

Contingencies $3,847,000 (DC) X 20.0%

Total indirect costs (IC) $9,064,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $1,049,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $29,350,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated level

Maintenance labor and materials $577,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $702,000

Variable annual costs

Reagent $1,785,000 1,142 lb/hr and 420 $/ton Nalco Mobotec prop.

Auxiliary and ID fan power $1,413,000 3,112 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Nalco Mobotec prop.

Water $3,000 21 gpm and 0.33 $/1,000 ga Nalco Mobotec prop.

Total variable annual costs $3,201,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $3,903,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $2,859,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $2,859,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $6,762,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Technology: ROFA & Rotamix - SJGS Unit 2 Date: 8/15/2008

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

ROFA-Rotamix system scope: $8,782,000 Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

ROFA fan

ROFA ports with boiler tube bends

ROFA ductwork

Instrumentation for ROFA

Rotamix fan

Rotamix ports with boiler tube bends

Reagent and water storage tanks

Reagent, water pump skids

Rotamix injection lances

Instrumentation for Rotamix

Contingency for combustion system modifications $125,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

NOx monitoring system $220,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Electrical system upgrades $1,348,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $10,475,000

Gross Receipt Tax $648,141 (CC) X 6.2%

Freight $523,750 (CC) X 5.0%

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $11,647,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $819,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Handling & erection $3,545,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Electrical $1,002,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Piping included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Insulation included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Painting included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Demolition $585,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Relocation $568,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $6,519,000

Air preheater modifications $1,071,000 B&V cost estimate

Site preparation $0 N/A

Buildings $0 N/A

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $19,237,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $1,947,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Owner's cost $962,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Construction management $1,631,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Start-up and spare parts $577,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Performance test $100,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate

Contingencies $3,847,000 (DC) X 20.0%

Total indirect costs (IC) $9,064,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $1,049,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $29,350,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated level

Maintenance labor and materials $577,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $702,000

Variable annual costs

Reagent $1,785,000 1,142 lb/hr and 420 $/ton Nalco Mobotec prop.

Auxiliary and ID fan power $1,413,000 3,112 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Nalco Mobotec prop.

Water $3,000 21 gpm and 0.33 $/1,000 ga Nalco Mobotec prop.

Total variable annual costs $3,201,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $3,903,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $2,859,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $2,859,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $6,762,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Technology: ROFA & Rotamix - SJGS Unit 3 Date: 8/15/2008

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

ROFA-Rotamix system scope: $9,988,000 Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

ROFA fan

ROFA ports with boiler tube bends

ROFA ductwork

Instrumentation for ROFA

Rotamix fan

Rotamix ports with boiler tube bends

Reagent and water storage tanks

Reagent, water pump skids

Rotamix injection lances

Instrumentation for Rotamix

Contingency for combustion system modifications $125,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

NOx monitoring system $220,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Electrical system upgrades $1,456,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $11,789,000

Gross Receipt Tax $729,444 (CC) X 6.2%

Freight $589,450 (CC) X 5.0%

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $13,108,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $1,048,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Handling & erection $4,311,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Electrical $1,305,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Piping included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Insulation included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Painting included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Demolition $756,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Relocation $656,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $8,076,000

Air preheater modifications $1,071,000 B&V cost estimate

Site preparation $0 N/A

Buildings $0 N/A

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $22,255,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $2,300,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Owner's cost $1,113,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Construction management $1,966,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Start-up and spare parts $668,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Performance test $100,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate

Contingencies $4,451,000 (DC) X 20.0%

Total indirect costs (IC) $10,598,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $1,217,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $34,070,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated level

Maintenance labor and materials $668,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $793,000

Variable annual costs

Reagent $2,722,000 1,741 lb/hr and 420 $/ton Nalco Mobotec prop.

Auxiliary and ID fan power $2,810,000 6,186 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Nalco Mobotec prop.

Water $5,000 32 gpm and 0.33 $/1,000 ga Nalco Mobotec prop.

Total variable annual costs $5,537,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $6,330,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $3,318,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $3,318,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $9,648,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Technology: ROFA & Rotamix - SJGS Unit 4 Date: 8/15/2008

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

ROFA-Rotamix system scope: $9,988,000 Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

ROFA fan

ROFA ports with boiler tube bends

ROFA ductwork

Instrumentation for ROFA

Rotamix fan

Rotamix ports with boiler tube bends

Reagent and water storage tanks

Reagent, water pump skids

Rotamix injection lances

Instrumentation for Rotamix

Contingency for combustion system modifications $125,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

NOx monitoring system $220,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Electrical system upgrades $1,456,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $11,789,000

Gross Receipt Tax $729,444 (CC) X 6.2%

Freight $589,450 (CC) X 5.0%

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $13,108,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $1,048,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Handling & erection $4,311,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Electrical $1,305,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Piping included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Insulation included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Painting included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008

Demolition $756,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Relocation $656,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $8,076,000

Air preheater modifications $1,071,000 B&V cost estimate

Site preparation $0 N/A

Buildings $0 N/A

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $22,255,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $2,300,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Owner's cost $1,113,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Construction management $1,966,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost

Start-up and spare parts $668,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Performance test $100,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate

Contingencies $4,451,000 (DC) X 20.0%

Total indirect costs (IC) $10,598,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $1,217,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $34,070,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated level

Maintenance labor and materials $668,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $793,000

Variable annual costs

Reagent $2,722,000 1,741 lb/hr and 420 $/ton Nalco Mobotec prop.

Auxiliary and ID fan power $2,810,000 6,186 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Nalco Mobotec prop.

Water $5,000 32 gpm and 0.33 $/1,000 ga Nalco Mobotec prop.

Total variable annual costs $5,537,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $6,330,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $3,318,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $3,318,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $9,648,000
1

Estimating Notes for ROFA Cost Estimate 

4.1 ROFA System Cost 

Inputs: 

Nalco Mobotec proposal costs (dated 2/1/2008)

SJGS 1 or 2 ROFA/Rotamix = $8,782,220

SJGS 3 or 4 ROFA/Rotamix = $9,987,917

SJGS 1 or 2 Rotamix only = $2,101,687

SJGS 1 or 2 Rotamix only = $2,336,853

Calculation:

ROFA System Cost = ROFA/Rotamix cost – Rotamix only cost 

SJGS 1 or 2 ROFA System Cost = $8,782,220 - $2,101,687 = $6,681,00 

SJGS 3 or 4 ROFA System Cost = $9,987,917 - $2,336,853 = $7,651,000 

Notes/Remarks:

Reference cost was based on Nalco Mobotec proposal (February 1, 2008) for 

ROFA/Rotamix and Rotamix only systems. 

4.2.a Combustion System Modifications (SJGS 1 or 2) 

Inputs:

Reference unit cost (18 burners) = $650,000 

(previous B&V project with ROFA) 

Reference unit burner heat input = 133.3 MBtu/hr 

PNM (U12) burner heat input = 231.7 MBtu/hr 

PNM (U12) number of burners = 16 

Calculation:

000,000,1$cos

3.133

7.231

18

16 000,650$cos

___

___

#_

#_

cos cos_

=

⎟

⎠

⎞ ⎜

⎝

⎛ ⎟×

⎠

⎞ ⎜

⎝

⎛ = ×

⎟

⎟

⎠

⎞

⎜

⎜

⎝

⎛

×⎟

⎟

⎠

⎞

⎜

⎜

⎝

⎛ = ×

tPNM

tPNM

burnerref inputheat

PNM burner inputheat

reference burner

PNM burner tPNM reference t
2

4.2.b Combustion System Modifications (SJGS 3 or 4) 

Inputs:

Reference unit cost (18 burners) = $650,000 

(previous B&V project with ROFA) 

Reference unit burner heat input = 133.3 MBtu/hr 

PNM (U34) burner heat input = 137.1 MBtu/hr 

PNM (U34) number of burners = 42 

Calculation:

000,500,1$cos

3.133

1.137

18

42 000,650$cos

___

___

#_

#_

cos cos_

=

⎟

⎠

⎞ ⎜

⎝

⎛ ⎟×

⎠

⎞ ⎜

⎝

⎛ = ×

⎟

⎟

⎠

⎞

⎜

⎜

⎝

⎛

×⎟

⎟

⎠

⎞

⎜

⎜

⎝

⎛ = ×

tPNM

tPNM

burnerref inputheat

PNM burner inputheat

reference burner

PNM burner tPNM reference t

4.3 NOx Monitoring System 

Inputs:

Escalation rate = 1.03 (1 year to 2007) 

Reference cost = $427,200 

Calculation:

)_(000,220$2/000,440$cos

)_(000,440$cos

200,427$03.1cos

cos _ cos_

tPNM ROFA

tPNM SCR

tPNM

tPNM escalation rate reference t

= =

=

×=

= ×

Notes/Remarks:

Reference cost was based on a preliminary quotation. Final awarded contract was 

$779,450. The final price also included sampling fans at a price of $17,555 for 2 units. 

Pricing used for SCR cost estimate (2 reactors). Cost for ROFA is for 1 system only 

(half). 
3

4.4 Electrical System Upgrades 

Electrical system upgrades for the ROFA fans are based on the total electrical 

system modifications and new transformer for the new ID fans in the SCR project cost 

estimates. This is based on the assumption that similar electrical system upgrades are 

required for the relatively similar sized fans between the ROFA and SCR projects. 

The attached table shows a breakdown of the cost estimate for electrical/control 

modifications of the PNM SJGS, required if an SCR were installed. The cost estimate 

was developed based on reference to the project cost of other reference units where B&V 

performed a balanced draft conversion. A scaling and retrofit factor was used to 

determine the engineering & material and construction labor costs. 

The total direct cost is the summation of the engineering and material, and 

construction labor costs. 

Reference Unit SJGS 1 or 2 SJGS 3 or 4 

Balanced Draft 

Conversion 

Engineering 

& Material 

Construction 

Labor Costs

Engineering 

& Material

Construction 

Labor Costs 

Engineering 

& Material

Construction 

Labor Costs

Electrical/Control 

Modifications $285,000 $600,000

$159,000 $335,000 

$214,000 $450,000

New transformer 

(subcontract) 

$1,000,000

$1,000,000 

 
4

4.5 Direct Installation Costs Development Notes (for SJGS 1 or 2) 

4.5.1 Foundation and supports

a. ROFA structural steel = included with Nalco Mobotec ROFA system 

b. Foundation for ROFA fans = $200,000 

 Based on estimated foundation size for ROFA fan 

c. New platforms at ROFA ports elevation = $51,750 

 Quantity of platforms = 2 qty 

Estimated platform size (based on plant layout drawings) = 270 ft2

 / 2.5 tons 

Platform construction cost (labor + material) = $4,600/ton 

Cost per platform = $11,500 

Construction indirect = 125% of construction cost (B&V estimating group 

expected value for this construction scope) 

4.5.2 Handling and erection

a. Mobotec installation = $1,592,750 (from Nalco Mobotec proposal, 

b. Inventory holding cost = $250,000 

 Estimated labor for holding = 1 man-year equivalent = $124,862 

 Estimated material cost for inventory holding = $125,000 

4.5.3 Electrical

a. installation cost for new ROFA fans = $435,000 

 From table in Section 4.4: 

 Construction labor cost = $335,000 

 Construction indirect cost = $100,000 

4.5.4 Piping

a. included with Nalco Mobotec ROFA system 

4.5.5 Insulation

a. included with Nalco Mobotec ROFA system 

4.5.6 Painting

a. included with Nalco Mobotec ROFA system 

4.5.7 Demolition

a. ductwork demolition cost = $291,600 

 Estimated ductwork quantity for demolition (based on plant layout drawings) 

= 160 tons 

Estimated man-hour for demolition = 2,880 hours 

Labor rate = $45/man-hour 

Ductwork demolition cost = $129,600 

Construction indirect = 125% of construction cost (B&V estimating group 

expected value for this construction scope) 
5

b. platform demolition cost = $9,113 

Estimated platform quantity for demolition (based on plant layout drawings) 

= 5 tons 

Estimated man-hour for demolition = 90 hours 

Labor rate = $45/man-hour 

Ductwork demolition cost = $4,050 

Construction indirect = 125% of construction cost (B&V estimating group 

expected value for this construction scope) 
6

4.6 Direct Installation Costs Development Notes (for SJGS 3 or 4) 

4.6.1 Foundation and supports

a. ROFA structural steel = included with Nalco Mobotec ROFA system 

b. Foundation for ROFA fans = $250,000 

 Based on estimated foundation size for ROFA fan 

c. New platforms at ROFA ports elevation = $77,625 

 Quantity of platforms = 2 qty 

Estimated platform size (based on plant layout drawings) = 360 ft2

 / 3.75 tons 

Platform construction cost (labor + material) = $4,600/ton 

Cost per platform = $17,250 

Construction indirect = 125% of construction cost (B&V estimating group 

expected value for this construction scope) 

4.6.2 Handling and erection

a. Mobotec installation = $1,901,595 (from Nalco Mobotec proposal, 

b. Inventory holding cost = $250,000 

 Estimated labor for holding = 1 man-year equivalent = $124,862 

 Estimated material cost for inventory holding = $125,000 

4.6.3 Electrical

a. installation cost for new ROFA fans = $585,000 

 From table in Section 4.4: 

 Construction labor cost = $450,000 

 Construction indirect cost = $135,000 

4.6.4 Piping

a. included with Nalco Mobotec ROFA system 

4.6.5 Insulation

a. included with Nalco Mobotec ROFA system 

4.6.6 Painting

a. included with Nalco Mobotec ROFA system 

4.6.7 Demolition

a. ductwork demolition cost = $382,725 

Estimated ductwork quantity for demolition (based on plant layout drawings) 

= 210 tons 

Estimated man-hour for demolition = 3,780 hours 

Labor rate = $45/man-hour 

Ductwork demolition cost = $170,100 

Construction indirect = 125% of construction cost (B&V estimating group 

expected value for this construction scope) 

b. platform demolition cost = $13,669 

Estimated platform quantity for demolition (based on plant layout drawings) 

= 7.5 tons 
7

Estimated man-hour for demolition = 135 hours 

Labor rate = $45/man-hour 

Ductwork demolition cost = $6,075 

Construction indirect = 125% of construction cost (B&V estimating group 

expected value for this construction scope) 
Attachment 2 –Page 1 of 5 

Attachment 2
Attachment 2 –Page 2 of 5 

SJGS Unit 1, Heat Input (HHV) = 3,707 MBtu/hrStack Outlet Conditions Flow (acfm) Stack Velocity (ft/s) Temperature (°F) Pressure (in, wg) NOx (lb/MBtu) NOx (lb/hr) SO2 (lb/MBtu) SO2 (lb/hr) PM (lb/MBtu) PM (lb/hr) SO

 (lb/MB

Pre-Consent Decree Operation 1,406,021 74 145.00 -0.20 0.43 1,592.0 0.24 877.8 0.050 185.4 0.01Visibility Modeling Baseline CasePost-Consent Decree Upgrades (LNB/OFA, PJFF) 1,323,494 70 121.42 0.01 0.33 1,223.3 0.18 667.3 0.015 55.6 0.01With additional NOx Control Technologies

1. Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) 1,325,998 70 121.42 0.01 0.07 259.5 0.18 667.3 0.015 55.6 0.032. SNCR/SCR Hybrid 1,324,112 70 121.42 0.01 0.18 667.3 0.18 667.3 0.015 55.6 0.03

3. ROFA and Rotamix 1,323,851 70 121.42 0.01 0.20 741.4 0.18 667.3 0.015 55.6 0.014. ACT HERT SNCR 1,323,851 70 121.42 0.01 0.20 741.4 0.18 667.3 0.015 55.6 0.01

4. Rotamix 1,323,904 70 121.42 0.01 0.23 852.6 0.18 667.3 0.015 55.6 0.015. FuelTech SNCR 1,323,904 70 121.42 0.01 0.24 889.7 0.18 667.3 0.015 55.6 0.016. Rotating Overfire Air (ROFA) 1,323,494 70 121.42 0.01 0.26 963.8 0.18 667.3 0.015 55.6 0.01Notes1. Emission levels (lb/MBtu) shown are on a 24-hour average basis.2. Emission in (lb/hr) is calculated based on the emission level (lb/MBtu) and design basis heat input.3. Emission levels on a 24-hour average basis are assumed to be similar to the annual average basis.4. Pre-consent decree operation emission level (lb/MBtu) are based on annual averages from year 2001 to 2003.5. Post-consent decree upgrades emissions for visibility modeling purpose are based on information provided by PNM, 4/19/2007.6. Stack velocity is calculated based upon volumetric flowrate and 6.10 m stack diameter.7. All flow conditions are based on the coal as shown in the Design Basis document.8. All SO3 emissions are reported as Sulfuric Acid Mist (H2SO4).

9. SO3 emissions for the pre- and post-consent decree cases are determined using the National Park Service calculation formula.

10. SO3 emissions for the additional NOx control technologies with catalyst accounts for an additional 1.0% SO2 to SO3 conversion (based on design basis economizer outlet SO2 levels) and 0% SO3 removal in PJFF.

11. Pre-CD flue gas flow, temperature, pressure properties were referenced from PM test reports for year 2001 to 2003.

Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM) - San Juan Generating Station (SJGS) Unit 1

Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Engineering Analysis

Stack Outlet Conditions for Visibility Modeling (24-hour Average Emission Rates) Rev. 7
Attachment 2 –Page 3 of 5 

SJGS Unit 2, Heat Input (HHV) = 3,688 MBtu/hrStack Outlet Conditions Flow (acfm) Stack Velocity (ft/s) Temperature (°F) Pressure (in, wg) NOx (lb/MBtu) NOx (lb/hr) SO2 (lb/MBtu) SO2 (lb/hr) PM (lb/MBtu) PM (lb/hr) SO

 (lb/MB

Pre-Consent Decree Operation 1,444,718 77 148.00 -0.16 0.45 1,649.3 0.23 844.0 0.050 184.4 0.01Visibility Modeling Baseline CasePost-Consent Decree Upgrades (LNB/OFA, PJFF) 1,316,710 70 121.42 0.01 0.33 1,217.0 0.18 663.8 0.015 55.3 0.01With additional NOx Control Technologies

1. Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) 1,319,201 70 121.42 0.01 0.07 258.2 0.18 663.8 0.015 55.3 0.032. SNCR/SCR Hybrid 1,317,328 70 121.42 0.01 0.18 663.8 0.18 663.8 0.015 55.3 0.03

3. ROFA and Rotamix 1,317,067 70 121.42 0.01 0.20 737.6 0.18 663.8 0.015 55.3 0.014. ACT HERT SNCR 1,317,067 70 121.42 0.01 0.20 737.6 0.18 663.8 0.015 55.3 0.01

4. Rotamix 1,317,120 70 121.42 0.01 0.23 848.2 0.18 663.8 0.015 55.3 0.015. FuelTech SNCR 1,317,120 70 121.42 0.01 0.24 885.1 0.18 663.8 0.015 55.3 0.016. Rotating Overfire Air (ROFA) 1,316,710 70 121.42 0.01 0.26 958.9 0.18 663.8 0.015 55.3 0.01Notes1. Emission levels (lb/MBtu) shown are on a 24-hour average basis.2. Emission in (lb/hr) is calculated based on the emission level (lb/MBtu) and design basis heat input.3. Emission levels on a 24-hour average basis are assumed to be similar to the annual average basis.4. Pre-consent decree operation emission level (lb/MBtu) are based on annual averages from year 2001 to 2003.5. Post-consent decree upgrades emissions for visibility modeling purpose are based on information provided by PNM, 4/19/2007.6. Stack velocity is calculated based upon volumetric flowrate and 6.10 m stack diameter.7. All flow conditions are based on the coal as shown in the Design Basis document.8. All SO3 emissions are reported as Sulfuric Acid Mist (H2SO4).

9. SO3 emissions for the pre- and post-consent decree cases are determined using the National Park Service calculation formula.

10. SO3 emissions for the additional NOx control technologies with catalyst accounts for an additional 1.0% SO2 to SO3 conversion (based on design basis economizer outlet SO2 levels) and 0% SO3 removal in PJFF.

11. Pre-CD flue gas flow, temperature, pressure properties were referenced from PM test reports for year 2001 to 2003.

Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM) - San Juan Generating Station (SJGS) Unit 2

Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Engineering Analysis

Stack Outlet Conditions for Visibility Modeling (24-hour Average Emission Rates) Rev. 7
Attachment 2 –Page 4 of 5 

SJGS Unit 3, Heat Input (HHV) = 5,758 MBtu/hrStack Outlet Conditions Flow (acfm) Stack Velocity (ft/s) Temperature (°F) Pressure (in, wg) NOx (lb/MBtu) NOx (lb/hr) SO2 (lb/MBtu) SO2 (lb/hr) PM (lb/MBtu) PM (lb/hr) SO

 (lb/MB

Pre-Consent Decree Operation 2,075,452 56 143.00 -0.22 0.42 2,405.5 0.28 1,591.1 0.050 287.9 0.01Visibility Modeling Baseline CasePost-Consent Decree Upgrades (LNB/OFA, PJFF) 2,055,753 56 121.42 0.01 0.33 1,900.1 0.18 1,036.4 0.015 86.4 0.01With additional NOx Control Technologies

1. Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) 2,059,643 56 121.42 0.01 0.07 403.1 0.18 1,036.4 0.015 86.4 0.032. SNCR/SCR Hybrid 2,056,712 56 121.42 0.01 0.18 1,036.4 0.18 1,036.4 0.015 86.4 0.03

3. ROFA and Rotamix 2,056,299 56 121.42 0.01 0.20 1,151.6 0.18 1,036.4 0.015 86.4 0.014. ACT HERT SNCR 2,056,299 56 121.42 0.01 0.20 1,151.6 0.18 1,036.4 0.015 86.4 0.01

4. Rotamix 2,056,389 56 121.42 0.01 0.23 1,324.3 0.18 1,036.4 0.015 86.4 0.015. FuelTech SNCR 2,056,389 56 121.42 0.01 0.24 1,381.9 0.18 1,036.4 0.015 86.4 0.016. Rotating Overfire Air (ROFA) 2,055,753 56 121.42 0.01 0.26 1,497.1 0.18 1,036.4 0.015 86.4 0.01Notes1. Emission levels (lb/MBtu) shown are on a 24-hour average basis.2. Emission in (lb/hr) is calculated based on the emission level (lb/MBtu) and design basis heat input.3. Emission levels on a 24-hour average basis are assumed to be similar to the annual average basis.4. Pre-consent decree operation emission level (lb/MBtu) are based on annual averages from year 2001 to 2003.5. Post-consent decree upgrades emissions for visibility modeling purpose are based on information provided by PNM, 4/19/2007.6. Stack velocity is calculated based upon volumetric flowrate and 6.10 m stack diameter.7. All flow conditions are based on the coal as shown in the Design Basis document.8. All SO3 emissions are reported as Sulfuric Acid Mist (H2SO4).

9. SO3 emissions for the pre- and post-consent decree cases are determined using the National Park Service calculation formula.

10. SO3 emissions for the additional NOx control technologies with catalyst accounts for an additional 1.0% SO2 to SO3 conversion (based on design basis economizer outlet SO2 levels) and 0% SO3 removal in PJFF.

11. Pre-CD flue gas flow, temperature, pressure properties were referenced from PM test reports for year 2001 to 2003.

Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM) - San Juan Generating Station (SJGS) Unit 3

Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Engineering Analysis

Stack Outlet Conditions for Visibility Modeling (24-hour Average Emission Rates) Rev. 7
Attachment 2 –Page 5 of 5 

SJGS Unit 4, Heat Input (HHV) = 5,649 MBtu/hrStack Outlet Conditions Flow (acfm) Stack Velocity (ft/s) Temperature (°F) Pressure (in, wg) NOx (lb/MBtu) NOx (lb/hr) SO2 (lb/MBtu) SO2 (lb/hr) PM (lb/MBtu) PM (lb/hr) SO

 (lb/MB

Pre-Consent Decree Operation 2,093,240 57 137.00 -0.21 0.42 2,399.6 0.29 1,662.4 0.050 282.5 0.01Visibility Modeling Baseline CasePost-Consent Decree Upgrades (LNB/OFA, PJFF) 2,016,837 55 121.42 0.01 0.33 1,864.2 0.18 1,016.8 0.015 84.7 0.01With additional NOx Control Technologies

1. Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) 2,020,653 55 121.42 0.01 0.07 395.4 0.18 1,016.8 0.015 84.7 0.032. SNCR/SCR Hybrid 2,017,796 55 121.42 0.01 0.18 1,016.8 0.18 1,016.8 0.015 84.7 0.03

3. ROFA and Rotamix 2,017,383 55 121.42 0.01 0.20 1,129.8 0.18 1,016.8 0.015 84.7 0.014. ACT HERT SNCR 2,017,383 55 121.42 0.01 0.20 1,129.8 0.18 1,016.8 0.015 84.7 0.01

4. Rotamix 2,017,473 55 121.42 0.01 0.23 1,299.3 0.18 1,016.8 0.015 84.7 0.015. FuelTech SNCR 2,017,473 55 121.42 0.01 0.24 1,355.8 0.18 1,016.8 0.015 84.7 0.016. Rotating Overfire Air (ROFA) 2,016,837 55 121.42 0.01 0.26 1,468.7 0.18 1,016.8 0.015 84.7 0.01Notes1. Emission levels (lb/MBtu) shown are on a 24-hour average basis.2. Emission in (lb/hr) is calculated based on the emission level (lb/MBtu) and design basis heat input.3. Emission levels on a 24-hour average basis are assumed to be similar to the annual average basis.4. Pre-consent decree operation emission level (lb/MBtu) are based on annual averages from year 2001 to 2003.5. Post-consent decree upgrades emissions for visibility modeling purpose are based on information provided by PNM, 4/19/2007.6. Stack velocity is calculated based upon volumetric flowrate and 6.10 m stack diameter.7. All flow conditions are based on the coal as shown in the Design Basis document.8. All SO3 emissions are reported as Sulfuric Acid Mist (H2SO4).

9. SO3 emissions for the pre- and post-consent decree cases are determined using the National Park Service calculation formula.

10. SO3 emissions for the additional NOx control technologies with catalyst accounts for an additional 1.0% SO2 to SO3 conversion (based on design basis economizer outlet SO2 levels) and 0% SO3 removal in PJFF.

11. Pre-CD flue gas flow, temperature, pressure properties were referenced from PM test reports for year 2001 to 2003.

Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM) - San Juan Generating Station (SJGS) Unit 4

Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Engineering Analysis

Stack Outlet Conditions for Visibility Modeling (24-hour Average Emission Rates) Rev. 7
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 1 of 31 

Attachment 3
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 2 of 31 

Table 1 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Facility 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.92 1.76 1.82 1.83 1.92 

Bandelier 1.31 1.86 1.51 1.56 1.86 

Black Canyon 1.14 1.34 1.40 1.29 1.40 

Canyonlands 2.59 2.04 2.00 2.21 2.59 

Capitol Reef 1.97 1.16 1.34 1.49 1.97 

Grand Canyon 1.14 0.93 0.81 0.96 1.14 

Great Sand Dunes 0.85 1.00 0.82 0.89 1.00 

La Garita 1.15 1.30 1.14 1.20 1.30 

Maroon Bells 0.67 0.78 0.63 0.70 0.78 

Mesa Verde 4.20 4.09 4.85 4.38 4.85 

Pecos 1.40 1.33 1.26 1.33 1.40 

Petrified Forest 1.13 0.79 0.74 0.88 1.13 

San Pedro 1.78 2.37 1.96 2.04 2.37 

West Elk 0.99 1.15 0.94 1.03 1.15 

Weminuche 1.51 1.85 1.69 1.69 1.85 

Wheeler Peak 1.00 0.95 1.05 1.00 1.05 

Overall 1.53 4.85 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 3 of 31 

Table 2 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Facility 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.69 1.65 1.49 1.61 1.69 

Bandelier 1.04 1.56 1.20 1.27 1.56 

Black Canyon 0.95 1.15 1.07 1.05 1.15 

Canyonlands 2.26 1.73 1.68 1.89 2.26 

Capitol Reef 1.81 0.82 1.05 1.23 1.81 

Grand Canyon 0.97 0.76 0.57 0.77 0.97 

Great Sand Dunes 0.63 0.71 0.64 0.66 0.71 

La Garita 0.86 0.94 0.90 0.90 0.94 

Maroon Bells 0.54 0.56 0.51 0.54 0.56 

Mesa Verde 3.38 3.53 3.80 3.57 3.80 

Pecos 1.05 1.09 1.00 1.05 1.09 

Petrified Forest 0.82 0.60 0.53 0.65 0.82 

San Pedro 1.40 2.01 1.56 1.66 2.01 

West Elk 0.80 0.91 0.83 0.85 0.91 

Weminuche 1.15 1.48 1.34 1.33 1.48 

Wheeler Peak 0.75 0.86 0.89 0.83 0.89 

Overall 1.24 3.80 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 4 of 31 

Table 3 

ROFA/Rotamix Visibility Modeling Results - Facility 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.58 1.40 1.25 1.41 1.58 

Bandelier 0.88 1.28 1.08 1.08 1.28 

Black Canyon 0.82 0.91 0.93 0.89 0.93 

Canyonlands 2.10 1.55 1.57 1.74 2.10 

Capitol Reef 1.55 0.65 0.93 1.05 1.55 

Grand Canyon 0.79 0.63 0.56 0.66 0.79 

Great Sand Dunes 0.56 0.60 0.48 0.55 0.60 

La Garita 0.68 0.74 0.71 0.71 0.74 

Maroon Bells 0.47 0.44 0.40 0.44 0.47 

Mesa Verde 3.34 3.18 3.58 3.37 3.58 

Pecos 0.82 0.86 0.88 0.85 0.88 

Petrified Forest 0.73 0.50 0.49 0.57 0.73 

San Pedro 1.28 1.67 1.45 1.47 1.67 

West Elk 0.69 0.71 0.65 0.68 0.71 

Weminuche 0.97 1.24 1.07 1.09 1.24 

Wheeler Peak 0.65 0.69 0.70 0.68 0.70 

Overall 1.08 3.58 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 5 of 31 

Table 4 

Rotamix Visibility Modeling Results - Facility 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.61 1.49 1.27 1.45 1.61 

Bandelier 0.91 1.35 1.14 1.13 1.35 

Black Canyon 0.84 0.98 0.96 0.92 0.98 

Canyonlands 2.13 1.60 1.60 1.78 2.13 

Capitol Reef 1.62 0.71 0.98 1.10 1.62 

Grand Canyon 0.84 0.64 0.57 0.68 0.84 

Great Sand Dunes 0.57 0.61 0.51 0.56 0.61 

La Garita 0.74 0.79 0.77 0.77 0.79 

Maroon Bells 0.50 0.47 0.43 0.47 0.50 

Mesa Verde 3.35 3.21 3.58 3.38 3.58 

Pecos 0.88 0.92 0.91 0.90 0.92 

Petrified Forest 0.77 0.54 0.50 0.60 0.77 

San Pedro 1.30 1.77 1.47 1.51 1.77 

West Elk 0.73 0.76 0.69 0.73 0.76 

Weminuche 1.03 1.32 1.14 1.16 1.32 

Wheeler Peak 0.68 0.75 0.74 0.72 0.75 

Overall 1.12 3.58 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 6 of 31 

Table 5 

ROFA Visibility Modeling Results - Facility 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.63 1.53 1.29 1.48 1.63 

Bandelier 0.94 1.41 1.16 1.17 1.41 

Black Canyon 0.86 1.04 0.98 0.96 1.04 

Canyonlands 2.17 1.64 1.63 1.81 2.17 

Capitol Reef 1.68 0.76 1.04 1.16 1.68 

Grand Canyon 0.88 0.68 0.57 0.71 0.88 

Great Sand Dunes 0.58 0.65 0.54 0.59 0.65 

La Garita 0.79 0.83 0.80 0.81 0.83 

Maroon Bells 0.52 0.51 0.46 0.49 0.52 

Mesa Verde 3.36 3.23 3.59 3.39 3.59 

Pecos 0.93 0.97 0.92 0.94 0.97 

Petrified Forest 0.78 0.55 0.50 0.61 0.78 

San Pedro 1.32 1.86 1.49 1.56 1.86 

West Elk 0.74 0.80 0.74 0.76 0.80 

Weminuche 1.05 1.36 1.21 1.21 1.36 

Wheeler Peak 0.70 0.79 0.79 0.76 0.79 

Overall 1.15 3.59 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 7 of 31 

Table 6

SJGS Facility Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visibility Mode

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) 

(98th Percentile, see Note 1) Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for each Class 1 Area) 

Class 1 Area

Pre-Consent 

Decree Consent Decree ROFA/Rotamix Rotamix ROFA

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

Consent Decree

Consent Decree 

to 

ROFA/Rotamix

Consent Decree 

to Rotamix

Consent Decree 

to ROFA

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

ROFA/Rotamix

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

Rotamix

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

ROFA

Pre-Consent 

Decree to Cons

Decree

Arches 1.92 1.69 1.58 1.61 1.63 0.23 0.11 0.09 0.06 0.34 0.31 0.29 224,751,092 Bandelier 1.86 1.56 1.28 1.35 1.41 0.31 0.28 0.21 0.14 0.59 0.52 0.45 167,648,208 Black Canyon 1.40 1.15 0.93 0.98 1.04 0.26 0.22 0.17 0.11 0.48 0.43 0.37 201,835,294 Canyonlands 2.59 2.26 2.10 2.13 2.17 0.33 0.17 0.13 0.09 0.49 0.45 0.42 158,363,077 Capitol Reef 1.97 1.81 1.55 1.62 1.68 0.16 0.25 0.19 0.13 0.42 0.35 0.29 319,677,019 Grand Canyon 1.14 0.97 0.79 0.84 0.88 0.17 0.18 0.13 0.09 0.35 0.30 0.26 304,544,379 Great Sand Dunes 1.00 0.71 0.60 0.61 0.65 0.29 0.11 0.10 0.06 0.40 0.39 0.34 179,331,010 La Garita 1.30 0.94 0.74 0.79 0.83 0.36 0.20 0.16 0.11 0.56 0.52 0.47 142,966,667 Maroon Bells 0.78 0.56 0.47 0.50 0.52 0.22 0.09 0.06 0.04 0.31 0.28 0.26 236,091,743 Mesa Verde 4.85 3.80 3.58 3.58 3.59 1.06 0.22 0.22 0.21 1.28 1.27 1.27 48,692,526 Pecos 1.40 1.09 0.88 0.92 0.97 0.31 0.21 0.18 0.12 0.52 0.48 0.43 168,196,078 Petrified Forest 1.13 0.82 0.73 0.77 0.78 0.31 0.09 0.05 0.04 0.40 0.36 0.35 165,491,961 San Pedro 2.37 2.01 1.67 1.77 1.86 0.36 0.34 0.25 0.15 0.70 0.61 0.51 142,966,667 West Elk 1.15 0.91 0.71 0.76 0.80 0.24 0.21 0.16 0.11 0.44 0.40 0.35 216,252,101 Weminuche 1.85 1.48 1.24 1.32 1.36 0.37 0.24 0.16 0.12 0.62 0.53 0.49 138,727,763 Wheeler Peak 1.05 0.89 0.70 0.75 0.79 0.16 0.19 0.14 0.10 0.35 0.30 0.26 323,698,113 

Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data.2. NI = No Improvement3. NA = Not Applicable4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000):

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree $51,468 (Includes LNB/OFA/NN and PJFF)

Consent Decree to ROFA/Rotamix $32,820Consent Decree to Rotamix $16,952Consent Decree to ROFA $17,158Pre-Consent Decree to ROFA/Rotamix $84,288Pre-Consent Decree to Rotamix $68,420Pre-Consent Decree to ROFA $68,626
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 8 of 31 

Table 7 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 1 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.82 0.68 0.60 0.70 0.82 

Bandelier 0.31 0.49 0.54 0.45 0.54 

Black Canyon 0.35 0.37 0.38 0.37 0.38 

Canyonlands 1.10 0.84 0.71 0.88 1.10 

Capitol Reef 0.76 0.23 0.32 0.44 0.76 

Grand Canyon 0.31 0.21 0.16 0.23 0.31 

Great Sand Dunes 0.18 0.20 0.17 0.18 0.20 

La Garita 0.26 0.28 0.29 0.28 0.29 

Maroon Bells 0.18 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.18 

Mesa Verde 1.51 1.79 1.67 1.66 1.79 

Pecos 0.29 0.31 0.35 0.32 0.35 

Petrified Forest 0.25 0.16 0.14 0.18 0.25 

San Pedro 0.61 0.73 0.63 0.66 0.73 

West Elk 0.27 0.28 0.25 0.27 0.28 

Weminuche 0.37 0.54 0.45 0.45 0.54 

Wheeler Peak 0.24 0.25 0.26 0.25 0.26 

Overall 0.47 1.79 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 9 of 31 

Table 8 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 1 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.69 0.54 0.52 0.58 0.69 

Bandelier 0.24 0.40 0.37 0.34 0.40 

Black Canyon 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.29 0.29 

Canyonlands 1.00 0.65 0.57 0.74 1.00 

Capitol Reef 0.57 0.18 0.23 0.33 0.57 

Grand Canyon 0.27 0.16 0.12 0.18 0.27 

Great Sand Dunes 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 

La Garita 0.19 0.21 0.21 0.20 0.21 

Maroon Bells 0.14 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.14 

Mesa Verde 1.35 1.40 1.27 1.34 1.40 

Pecos 0.23 0.24 0.27 0.25 0.27 

Petrified Forest 0.19 0.13 0.11 0.14 0.19 

San Pedro 0.44 0.59 0.50 0.51 0.59 

West Elk 0.22 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.22 

Weminuche 0.31 0.43 0.35 0.36 0.43 

Wheeler Peak 0.19 0.17 0.20 0.19 0.20 

Overall 0.37 1.40 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 10 of 31 

Table 9 

ROFA/Rotamix Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 1 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.52 0.39 0.42 0.44 0.52 

Bandelier 0.18 0.30 0.27 0.25 0.30 

Black Canyon 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.20 0.21 

Canyonlands 0.80 0.47 0.45 0.57 0.80 

Capitol Reef 0.41 0.13 0.21 0.25 0.41 

Grand Canyon 0.20 0.13 0.12 0.15 0.20 

Great Sand Dunes 0.11 0.12 0.10 0.11 0.12 

La Garita 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.15 0.16 

Maroon Bells 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.09 0.10 

Mesa Verde 1.13 1.17 1.03 1.11 1.17 

Pecos 0.17 0.19 0.22 0.19 0.22 

Petrified Forest 0.16 0.10 0.10 0.12 0.16 

San Pedro 0.32 0.44 0.39 0.39 0.44 

West Elk 0.17 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.17 

Weminuche 0.23 0.34 0.27 0.28 0.34 

Wheeler Peak 0.15 0.13 0.16 0.14 0.16 

Overall 0.29 1.17 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 11 of 31 

Table 10 

Rotamix Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 1 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.56 0.43 0.44 0.48 0.56 

Bandelier 0.20 0.32 0.29 0.27 0.32 

Black Canyon 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 

Canyonlands 0.85 0.51 0.48 0.61 0.85 

Capitol Reef 0.45 0.14 0.21 0.27 0.45 

Grand Canyon 0.21 0.14 0.12 0.16 0.21 

Great Sand Dunes 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.12 

La Garita 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 

Maroon Bells 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.10 0.11 

Mesa Verde 1.17 1.23 1.11 1.17 1.23 

Pecos 0.18 0.20 0.23 0.21 0.23 

Petrified Forest 0.16 0.11 0.10 0.12 0.16 

San Pedro 0.35 0.47 0.42 0.41 0.47 

West Elk 0.18 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.18 

Weminuche 0.25 0.36 0.30 0.30 0.36 

Wheeler Peak 0.16 0.14 0.17 0.15 0.17 

Overall 0.31 1.23 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 12 of 31 

Table 11 

ROFA Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 1 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.60 0.46 0.46 0.51 0.60 

Bandelier 0.22 0.34 0.32 0.29 0.34 

Black Canyon 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 

Canyonlands 0.90 0.55 0.50 0.65 0.90 

Capitol Reef 0.48 0.16 0.22 0.29 0.48 

Grand Canyon 0.23 0.15 0.12 0.16 0.23 

Great Sand Dunes 0.12 0.13 0.12 0.13 0.13 

La Garita 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 

Maroon Bells 0.12 0.10 0.09 0.10 0.12 

Mesa Verde 1.25 1.29 1.17 1.23 1.29 

Pecos 0.20 0.21 0.24 0.22 0.24 

Petrified Forest 0.18 0.11 0.10 0.13 0.18 

San Pedro 0.38 0.50 0.44 0.44 0.50 

West Elk 0.19 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.19 

Weminuche 0.27 0.38 0.32 0.32 0.38 

Wheeler Peak 0.17 0.14 0.18 0.16 0.18 

Overall 0.33 1.29 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 13 of 31 

Table 12

Unit 1 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visibility Modeling 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) 

(98th Percentile, see Note 1) Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for each Class 1 Area) 

Class 1 Area

Pre-Consent 

Decree Consent Decree ROFA/Rotamix Rotamix ROFA

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

Consent Decree

Consent Decree 

to 

ROFA/Rotamix

Consent Decree 

to Rotamix

Consent Decree 

to ROFA

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

ROFA/Rotamix

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

Rotamix

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

ROFA

Pre-Consent 

Decree to Cons

Decree

Arches 0.82 0.69 0.52 0.56 0.60 0.13 0.17 0.13 0.09 0.30 0.26 0.22 91,146,154 Bandelier 0.54 0.40 0.30 0.32 0.34 0.14 0.10 0.08 0.06 0.24 0.22 0.20 84,635,714 Black Canyon 0.38 0.29 0.21 0.22 0.24 0.09 0.09 0.07 0.05 0.18 0.16 0.14 131,655,556 Canyonlands 1.10 1.00 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.10 0.21 0.15 0.10 0.31 0.25 0.20 118,490,000 Capitol Reef 0.76 0.57 0.41 0.45 0.48 0.19 0.16 0.12 0.09 0.35 0.31 0.28 62,363,158 Grand Canyon 0.31 0.27 0.20 0.21 0.23 0.04 0.07 0.06 0.04 0.11 0.10 0.08 296,225,000 Great Sand Dunes 0.20 0.14 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.06 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.08 0.08 0.07 197,483,333 La Garita 0.29 0.21 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.08 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.13 0.12 0.11 148,112,500 Maroon Bells 0.18 0.14 0.10 0.11 0.12 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.08 0.07 0.06 296,225,000 Mesa Verde 1.79 1.40 1.17 1.23 1.29 0.39 0.23 0.17 0.11 0.62 0.56 0.50 30,382,051 Pecos 0.35 0.27 0.22 0.23 0.24 0.08 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.13 0.12 0.11 148,112,500 Petrified Forest 0.25 0.19 0.16 0.16 0.18 0.06 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.10 0.09 0.08 197,483,333 San Pedro 0.73 0.59 0.44 0.47 0.50 0.14 0.15 0.13 0.09 0.29 0.27 0.23 84,635,714 West Elk 0.28 0.22 0.17 0.18 0.19 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.03 0.12 0.10 0.09 197,483,333 Weminuche 0.54 0.43 0.34 0.36 0.38 0.11 0.09 0.07 0.05 0.20 0.18 0.16 107,718,182 Wheeler Peak 0.26 0.20 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.06 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.10 0.09 0.08 197,483,333 

Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data.2. NI = No Improvement3. NA = Not Applicable4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000):

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree $11,849 (Includes LNB/OFA/NN and PJFF)Consent Decree to ROFA/Rotamix $6,762Consent Decree to Rotamix $3,547Consent Decree to ROFA $3,455Pre-Consent Decree to ROFA/Rotamix $8,184Pre-Consent Decree to Rotamix $4,969Pre-Consent Decree to ROFA $4,877
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 14 of 31 

Table 13 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 2 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.83 0.64 0.58 0.68 0.83 

Bandelier 0.32 0.50 0.54 0.45 0.54 

Black Canyon 0.36 0.37 0.39 0.37 0.39 

Canyonlands 1.07 0.83 0.72 0.87 1.07 

Capitol Reef 0.78 0.23 0.31 0.44 0.78 

Grand Canyon 0.31 0.20 0.16 0.22 0.31 

Great Sand Dunes 0.19 0.21 0.17 0.19 0.21 

La Garita 0.26 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.29 

Maroon Bells 0.18 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.18 

Mesa Verde 1.49 1.82 1.66 1.66 1.82 

Pecos 0.29 0.31 0.36 0.32 0.36 

Petrified Forest 0.25 0.16 0.14 0.18 0.25 

San Pedro 0.63 0.73 0.64 0.67 0.73 

West Elk 0.27 0.29 0.26 0.27 0.29 

Weminuche 0.38 0.56 0.44 0.46 0.56 

Wheeler Peak 0.24 0.26 0.26 0.25 0.26 

Overall 0.47 1.82 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 15 of 31 

Table 14 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 2 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.69 0.54 0.52 0.58 0.69 

Bandelier 0.23 0.40 0.37 0.33 0.40 

Black Canyon 0.28 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.29 

Canyonlands 0.99 0.65 0.57 0.74 0.99 

Capitol Reef 0.57 0.18 0.23 0.33 0.57 

Grand Canyon 0.27 0.16 0.12 0.18 0.27 

Great Sand Dunes 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 

La Garita 0.19 0.21 0.21 0.20 0.21 

Maroon Bells 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.14 

Mesa Verde 1.35 1.40 1.26 1.34 1.40 

Pecos 0.23 0.24 0.27 0.25 0.27 

Petrified Forest 0.19 0.13 0.11 0.14 0.19 

San Pedro 0.44 0.58 0.50 0.51 0.58 

West Elk 0.22 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.22 

Weminuche 0.31 0.42 0.35 0.36 0.42 

Wheeler Peak 0.18 0.17 0.20 0.18 0.20 

Overall 0.37 1.40 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 16 of 31 

Table 15 

ROFA/Rotamix Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 2 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.52 0.39 0.41 0.44 0.52 

Bandelier 0.18 0.29 0.27 0.25 0.29 

Black Canyon 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.20 0.21 

Canyonlands 0.79 0.47 0.45 0.57 0.79 

Capitol Reef 0.41 0.13 0.21 0.25 0.41 

Grand Canyon 0.20 0.13 0.12 0.15 0.20 

Great Sand Dunes 0.11 0.12 0.10 0.11 0.12 

La Garita 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.15 0.16 

Maroon Bells 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.09 0.10 

Mesa Verde 1.13 1.17 1.03 1.11 1.17 

Pecos 0.17 0.19 0.22 0.19 0.22 

Petrified Forest 0.15 0.10 0.10 0.12 0.15 

San Pedro 0.32 0.44 0.39 0.38 0.44 

West Elk 0.16 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.16 

Weminuche 0.22 0.34 0.27 0.28 0.34 

Wheeler Peak 0.14 0.13 0.16 0.14 0.16 

Overall 0.29 1.17 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 17 of 31 

Table 16 

Rotamix Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 2 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.56 0.43 0.44 0.47 0.56 

Bandelier 0.20 0.32 0.29 0.27 0.32 

Black Canyon 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 

Canyonlands 0.85 0.51 0.48 0.61 0.85 

Capitol Reef 0.45 0.14 0.21 0.27 0.45 

Grand Canyon 0.21 0.14 0.12 0.16 0.21 

Great Sand Dunes 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.12 

La Garita 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 

Maroon Bells 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.10 0.11 

Mesa Verde 1.16 1.22 1.10 1.16 1.22 

Pecos 0.18 0.20 0.23 0.20 0.23 

Petrified Forest 0.16 0.11 0.10 0.12 0.16 

San Pedro 0.35 0.46 0.42 0.41 0.46 

West Elk 0.18 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.18 

Weminuche 0.24 0.36 0.29 0.30 0.36 

Wheeler Peak 0.16 0.13 0.17 0.15 0.17 

Overall 0.31 1.22 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 18 of 31 

Table 17 

ROFA Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 2 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.60 0.46 0.46 0.51 0.60 

Bandelier 0.21 0.34 0.31 0.29 0.34 

Black Canyon 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.24 

Canyonlands 0.90 0.55 0.50 0.65 0.90 

Capitol Reef 0.48 0.15 0.22 0.28 0.48 

Grand Canyon 0.23 0.14 0.12 0.16 0.23 

Great Sand Dunes 0.12 0.13 0.12 0.12 0.13 

La Garita 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 

Maroon Bells 0.12 0.10 0.09 0.10 0.12 

Mesa Verde 1.24 1.28 1.16 1.23 1.28 

Pecos 0.20 0.21 0.24 0.22 0.24 

Petrified Forest 0.17 0.11 0.10 0.13 0.17 

San Pedro 0.38 0.50 0.44 0.44 0.50 

West Elk 0.19 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.19 

Weminuche 0.26 0.37 0.32 0.32 0.37 

Wheeler Peak 0.17 0.14 0.18 0.16 0.18 

Overall 0.33 1.28 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 19 of 31 

Table 18

Unit 2 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visibility Modeling 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) 

(98th Percentile, see Note 1) Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for each Class 1 Area) 

Class 1 Area

Pre-Consent 

Decree Consent Decree ROFA/Rotamix Rotamix ROFA

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

Consent Decree

Consent Decree 

to 

ROFA/Rotamix

Consent Decree 

to Rotamix

Consent Decree 

to ROFA

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

ROFA/Rotamix

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

Rotamix

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

ROFA

Pre-Consent 

Decree to Cons

Decree

Arches 0.83 0.69 0.52 0.56 0.60 0.14 0.17 0.13 0.09 0.31 0.27 0.23 86,728,571 Bandelier 0.54 0.40 0.29 0.32 0.34 0.14 0.11 0.08 0.06 0.25 0.22 0.20 86,728,571 Black Canyon 0.39 0.29 0.21 0.22 0.24 0.10 0.09 0.07 0.05 0.19 0.17 0.15 121,420,000 Canyonlands 1.07 0.99 0.79 0.85 0.90 0.08 0.20 0.14 0.09 0.28 0.22 0.17 151,775,000 Capitol Reef 0.78 0.57 0.41 0.45 0.48 0.21 0.16 0.12 0.09 0.37 0.33 0.30 57,819,048 Grand Canyon 0.31 0.27 0.20 0.21 0.23 0.04 0.07 0.06 0.04 0.11 0.10 0.08 303,550,000 Great Sand Dunes 0.21 0.14 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.07 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.09 0.09 0.08 173,457,143 La Garita 0.29 0.21 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.08 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.13 0.12 0.11 151,775,000 Maroon Bells 0.18 0.14 0.10 0.11 0.12 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.08 0.07 0.06 303,550,000 Mesa Verde 1.82 1.40 1.17 1.22 1.28 0.42 0.23 0.18 0.12 0.65 0.60 0.54 28,909,524 Pecos 0.36 0.27 0.22 0.23 0.24 0.09 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.14 0.13 0.12 134,911,111 Petrified Forest 0.25 0.19 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.06 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.10 0.09 0.08 202,366,667 San Pedro 0.73 0.58 0.44 0.46 0.50 0.15 0.14 0.12 0.08 0.29 0.27 0.23 80,946,667 West Elk 0.29 0.22 0.16 0.18 0.19 0.07 0.06 0.04 0.03 0.13 0.11 0.10 173,457,143 Weminuche 0.56 0.42 0.34 0.36 0.37 0.14 0.08 0.06 0.05 0.22 0.20 0.19 86,728,571 Wheeler Peak 0.26 0.20 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.06 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.10 0.09 0.08 202,366,667 

Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data.2. NI = No Improvement3. NA = Not Applicable4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000):

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree $12,142 (Includes LNB/OFA/NN and PJFF)Consent Decree to ROFA/Rotamix $6,762Consent Decree to Rotamix $3,547Consent Decree to ROFA $3,455Pre-Consent Decree to ROFA/Rotamix $8,140Pre-Consent Decree to Rotamix $4,925Pre-Consent Decree to ROFA $4,833
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 20 of 31 

Table 19 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 3 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.04 0.81 0.72 0.86 1.04 

Bandelier 0.53 0.81 0.71 0.68 0.81 

Black Canyon 0.58 0.53 0.59 0.57 0.59 

Canyonlands 1.44 1.04 0.96 1.15 1.44 

Capitol Reef 1.10 0.38 0.52 0.67 1.10 

Grand Canyon 0.48 0.33 0.26 0.36 0.48 

Great Sand Dunes 0.28 0.33 0.27 0.29 0.33 

La Garita 0.40 0.44 0.43 0.42 0.44 

Maroon Bells 0.24 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 

Mesa Verde 1.92 2.18 2.14 2.08 2.18 

Pecos 0.48 0.52 0.58 0.53 0.58 

Petrified Forest 0.43 0.25 0.24 0.31 0.43 

San Pedro 0.88 1.03 0.88 0.93 1.03 

West Elk 0.38 0.42 0.38 0.39 0.42 

Weminuche 0.59 0.82 0.65 0.69 0.82 

Wheeler Peak 0.37 0.39 0.37 0.38 0.39 

Overall 0.66 2.18 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 21 of 31 

Table 20 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 3 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.89 0.65 0.66 0.73 0.89 

Bandelier 0.39 0.57 0.61 0.52 0.61 

Black Canyon 0.44 0.41 0.46 0.44 0.46 

Canyonlands 1.15 0.85 0.79 0.93 1.15 

Capitol Reef 0.86 0.26 0.36 0.49 0.86 

Grand Canyon 0.35 0.24 0.19 0.26 0.35 

Great Sand Dunes 0.21 0.24 0.21 0.22 0.24 

La Garita 0.29 0.33 0.33 0.32 0.33 

Maroon Bells 0.20 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.20 

Mesa Verde 1.56 1.90 1.74 1.73 1.90 

Pecos 0.35 0.36 0.42 0.38 0.42 

Petrified Forest 0.29 0.18 0.17 0.21 0.29 

San Pedro 0.70 0.81 0.72 0.74 0.81 

West Elk 0.30 0.33 0.35 0.33 0.35 

Weminuche 0.44 0.64 0.50 0.53 0.64 

Wheeler Peak 0.28 0.31 0.28 0.29 0.31 

Overall 0.52 1.90 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 22 of 31 

Table 21 

ROFA/Rotamix Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 3 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.74 0.49 0.50 0.58 0.74 

Bandelier 0.29 0.45 0.45 0.40 0.45 

Black Canyon 0.32 0.30 0.34 0.32 0.34 

Canyonlands 0.97 0.64 0.63 0.75 0.97 

Capitol Reef 0.64 0.21 0.30 0.38 0.64 

Grand Canyon 0.26 0.20 0.18 0.21 0.26 

Great Sand Dunes 0.18 0.19 0.15 0.17 0.19 

La Garita 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 

Maroon Bells 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.14 0.15 

Mesa Verde 1.49 1.66 1.51 1.55 1.66 

Pecos 0.27 0.28 0.34 0.30 0.34 

Petrified Forest 0.24 0.16 0.15 0.19 0.24 

San Pedro 0.54 0.63 0.55 0.57 0.63 

West Elk 0.23 0.25 0.25 0.24 0.25 

Weminuche 0.33 0.48 0.37 0.39 0.48 

Wheeler Peak 0.21 0.24 0.22 0.22 0.24 

Overall 0.42 1.66 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 23 of 31 

Table 22 

Rotamix Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 3 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.78 0.53 0.54 0.62 0.78 

Bandelier 0.31 0.49 0.49 0.43 0.49 

Black Canyon 0.35 0.33 0.37 0.35 0.37 

Canyonlands 1.01 0.69 0.67 0.79 1.01 

Capitol Reef 0.69 0.23 0.32 0.41 0.69 

Grand Canyon 0.28 0.20 0.18 0.22 0.28 

Great Sand Dunes 0.18 0.19 0.16 0.18 0.19 

La Garita 0.26 0.27 0.26 0.27 0.27 

Maroon Bells 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.15 0.16 

Mesa Verde 1.49 1.73 1.57 1.60 1.73 

Pecos 0.29 0.30 0.36 0.31 0.36 

Petrified Forest 0.27 0.17 0.16 0.20 0.27 

San Pedro 0.58 0.66 0.59 0.61 0.66 

West Elk 0.24 0.26 0.27 0.26 0.27 

Weminuche 0.35 0.53 0.40 0.43 0.53 

Wheeler Peak 0.22 0.26 0.23 0.24 0.26 

Overall 0.44 1.73 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 24 of 31 

Table 23 

ROFA Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 3 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.82 0.56 0.58 0.65 0.82 

Bandelier 0.34 0.52 0.53 0.46 0.53 

Black Canyon 0.37 0.35 0.40 0.37 0.40 

Canyonlands 1.03 0.74 0.70 0.82 1.03 

Capitol Reef 0.74 0.24 0.34 0.44 0.74 

Grand Canyon 0.30 0.21 0.18 0.23 0.30 

Great Sand Dunes 0.19 0.21 0.18 0.19 0.21 

La Garita 0.26 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.29 

Maroon Bells 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.16 0.17 

Mesa Verde 1.50 1.78 1.62 1.64 1.78 

Pecos 0.31 0.31 0.38 0.33 0.38 

Petrified Forest 0.29 0.17 0.16 0.20 0.29 

San Pedro 0.62 0.71 0.64 0.65 0.71 

West Elk 0.26 0.28 0.30 0.28 0.30 

Weminuche 0.38 0.57 0.43 0.46 0.57 

Wheeler Peak 0.24 0.27 0.25 0.25 0.27 

Overall 0.46 1.78 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 25 of 31 

Table 24

Unit 3 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visibility Modeling 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) 

(98th Percentile, see Note 1) Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for each Class 1 Area) 

Class 1 Area

Pre-Consent 

Decree Consent Decree ROFA/Rotamix Rotamix ROFA

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

Consent Decree

Consent Decree 

to 

ROFA/Rotamix

Consent Decree 

to Rotamix

Consent Decree 

to ROFA

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

ROFA/Rotamix

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

Rotamix

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

ROFA

Pre-Consent 

Decree to Cons

Decree

Arches 1.04 0.89 0.74 0.78 0.82 0.15 0.15 0.11 0.07 0.30 0.26 0.22 91,293,333 Bandelier 0.81 0.61 0.45 0.49 0.53 0.20 0.16 0.12 0.08 0.36 0.32 0.28 68,470,000 Black Canyon 0.59 0.46 0.34 0.37 0.40 0.13 0.12 0.09 0.06 0.25 0.22 0.19 105,338,462 Canyonlands 1.44 1.15 0.97 1.01 1.03 0.29 0.18 0.15 0.12 0.47 0.44 0.41 47,220,690 Capitol Reef 1.10 0.86 0.64 0.69 0.74 0.24 0.22 0.17 0.12 0.46 0.41 0.36 57,058,333 Grand Canyon 0.48 0.35 0.26 0.28 0.30 0.13 0.10 0.08 0.05 0.23 0.21 0.18 105,338,462 Great Sand Dunes 0.33 0.24 0.19 0.19 0.21 0.09 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.14 0.14 0.12 152,155,556 La Garita 0.44 0.33 0.25 0.27 0.29 0.11 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.19 0.17 0.15 124,490,909 Maroon Bells 0.25 0.20 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.10 0.09 0.08 273,880,000 Mesa Verde 2.18 1.90 1.66 1.73 1.78 0.28 0.24 0.17 0.12 0.52 0.45 0.40 48,907,143 Pecos 0.58 0.42 0.34 0.36 0.38 0.16 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.24 0.22 0.20 85,587,500 Petrified Forest 0.43 0.29 0.24 0.27 0.29 0.14 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.19 0.16 0.14 97,814,286 San Pedro 1.03 0.81 0.63 0.66 0.71 0.22 0.18 0.15 0.10 0.40 0.37 0.32 62,245,455 West Elk 0.42 0.35 0.25 0.27 0.30 0.07 0.10 0.08 0.05 0.17 0.15 0.12 195,628,571 Weminuche 0.82 0.64 0.48 0.53 0.57 0.18 0.16 0.11 0.07 0.34 0.29 0.25 76,077,778 Wheeler Peak 0.39 0.31 0.24 0.26 0.27 0.08 0.07 0.05 0.04 0.15 0.13 0.12 171,175,000 

Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data.2. NI = No Improvement3. NA = Not Applicable4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000):

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree $13,694 (Includes LNB/OFA/NN and PJFF)Consent Decree to ROFA/Rotamix $9,648Consent Decree to Rotamix $4,929Consent Decree to ROFA $5,124Pre-Consent Decree to ROFA/Rotamix $10,888Pre-Consent Decree to Rotamix $6,169Pre-Consent Decree to ROFA $6,364
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 26 of 31 

Table 25 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 4 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.05 0.84 0.74 0.88 1.05 

Bandelier 0.54 0.81 0.71 0.69 0.81 

Black Canyon 0.58 0.54 0.59 0.57 0.59 

Canyonlands 1.47 1.06 0.97 1.17 1.47 

Capitol Reef 1.11 0.38 0.53 0.67 1.11 

Grand Canyon 0.48 0.34 0.27 0.36 0.48 

Great Sand Dunes 0.29 0.34 0.27 0.30 0.34 

La Garita 0.40 0.45 0.43 0.43 0.45 

Maroon Bells 0.24 0.25 0.24 0.24 0.25 

Mesa Verde 1.94 2.18 2.15 2.09 2.18 

Pecos 0.48 0.52 0.59 0.53 0.59 

Petrified Forest 0.44 0.27 0.25 0.32 0.44 

San Pedro 0.89 1.04 0.88 0.94 1.04 

West Elk 0.38 0.43 0.39 0.40 0.43 

Weminuche 0.59 0.81 0.65 0.68 0.81 

Wheeler Peak 0.37 0.41 0.38 0.39 0.41 

Overall 0.67 2.18 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 27 of 31 

Table 26 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 4 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.88 0.65 0.63 0.72 0.88 

Bandelier 0.38 0.56 0.60 0.51 0.60 

Black Canyon 0.42 0.42 0.44 0.43 0.44 

Canyonlands 1.14 0.85 0.78 0.92 1.14 

Capitol Reef 0.86 0.26 0.35 0.49 0.86 

Grand Canyon 0.36 0.24 0.18 0.26 0.36 

Great Sand Dunes 0.21 0.23 0.21 0.22 0.23 

La Garita 0.28 0.32 0.32 0.31 0.32 

Maroon Bells 0.20 0.19 0.18 0.19 0.20 

Mesa Verde 1.55 1.89 1.73 1.72 1.89 

Pecos 0.34 0.35 0.41 0.37 0.41 

Petrified Forest 0.29 0.18 0.17 0.21 0.29 

San Pedro 0.69 0.80 0.69 0.73 0.80 

West Elk 0.30 0.33 0.33 0.32 0.33 

Weminuche 0.43 0.63 0.49 0.52 0.63 

Wheeler Peak 0.28 0.30 0.28 0.29 0.30 

Overall 0.51 1.89 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 28 of 31 

Table 27 

ROFA/Rotamix Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 4 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.73 0.49 0.48 0.57 0.73 

Bandelier 0.29 0.44 0.44 0.39 0.44 

Black Canyon 0.31 0.30 0.34 0.32 0.34 

Canyonlands 0.97 0.64 0.62 0.74 0.97 

Capitol Reef 0.64 0.21 0.30 0.38 0.64 

Grand Canyon 0.26 0.19 0.17 0.21 0.26 

Great Sand Dunes 0.18 0.19 0.15 0.17 0.19 

La Garita 0.24 0.25 0.23 0.24 0.25 

Maroon Bells 0.15 0.14 0.13 0.14 0.15 

Mesa Verde 1.48 1.65 1.50 1.54 1.65 

Pecos 0.27 0.28 0.34 0.29 0.34 

Petrified Forest 0.24 0.16 0.15 0.18 0.24 

San Pedro 0.53 0.62 0.53 0.56 0.62 

West Elk 0.23 0.24 0.23 0.23 0.24 

Weminuche 0.32 0.48 0.36 0.39 0.48 

Wheeler Peak 0.21 0.23 0.21 0.22 0.23 

Overall 0.41 1.65 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 29 of 31 

Table 28 

Rotamix Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 4 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.77 0.53 0.51 0.61 0.77 

Bandelier 0.30 0.47 0.48 0.42 0.48 

Black Canyon 0.34 0.33 0.36 0.34 0.36 

Canyonlands 1.00 0.69 0.66 0.79 1.00 

Capitol Reef 0.69 0.22 0.32 0.41 0.69 

Grand Canyon 0.28 0.20 0.17 0.22 0.28 

Great Sand Dunes 0.18 0.19 0.16 0.18 0.19 

La Garita 0.25 0.27 0.25 0.26 0.27 

Maroon Bells 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.15 0.16 

Mesa Verde 1.49 1.71 1.56 1.59 1.71 

Pecos 0.28 0.29 0.35 0.31 0.35 

Petrified Forest 0.26 0.17 0.15 0.19 0.26 

San Pedro 0.57 0.65 0.57 0.59 0.65 

West Elk 0.24 0.26 0.26 0.25 0.26 

Weminuche 0.35 0.52 0.39 0.42 0.52 

Wheeler Peak 0.22 0.25 0.23 0.23 0.25 

Overall 0.43 1.71 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 30 of 31 

Table 29 

ROFA Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 4 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.81 0.57 0.55 0.64 0.81 

Bandelier 0.33 0.51 0.52 0.45 0.52 

Black Canyon 0.36 0.35 0.38 0.37 0.38 

Canyonlands 1.03 0.74 0.69 0.82 1.03 

Capitol Reef 0.74 0.24 0.33 0.44 0.74 

Grand Canyon 0.31 0.21 0.17 0.23 0.31 

Great Sand Dunes 0.18 0.20 0.17 0.19 0.20 

La Garita 0.26 0.28 0.27 0.27 0.28 

Maroon Bells 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.16 0.17 

Mesa Verde 1.50 1.77 1.62 1.63 1.77 

Pecos 0.30 0.31 0.37 0.33 0.37 

Petrified Forest 0.28 0.17 0.15 0.20 0.28 

San Pedro 0.61 0.69 0.60 0.63 0.69 

West Elk 0.26 0.28 0.28 0.27 0.28 

Weminuche 0.37 0.57 0.42 0.45 0.57 

Wheeler Peak 0.24 0.27 0.24 0.25 0.27 

Overall 0.46 1.77 

 
Attachment 3 – Results Tables Page 31 of 31 

Table 30

Unit 4 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visibility Modeling 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) 

(98th Percentile, see Note 1) Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for each Class 1 Area) 

Class 1 Area

Pre-Consent 

Decree Consent Decree ROFA/Rotamix Rotamix ROFA

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

Consent Decree

Consent Decree 

to 

ROFA/Rotamix

Consent Decree 

to Rotamix

Consent Decree 

to ROFA

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

ROFA/Rotamix

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

Rotamix

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

ROFA

Pre-Consent 

Decree to Conse

Decree

Arches 1.05 0.88 0.73 0.77 0.81 0.17 0.15 0.11 0.07 0.32 0.28 0.24 81,076,471 Bandelier 0.81 0.60 0.44 0.48 0.52 0.21 0.16 0.12 0.08 0.37 0.33 0.29 65,633,333 Black Canyon 0.59 0.44 0.34 0.36 0.38 0.15 0.10 0.08 0.06 0.25 0.23 0.21 91,886,667 Canyonlands 1.47 1.14 0.97 1.00 1.03 0.33 0.17 0.14 0.11 0.50 0.47 0.44 41,766,667 Capitol Reef 1.11 0.86 0.64 0.69 0.74 0.25 0.23 0.17 0.12 0.48 0.42 0.37 55,132,000 Grand Canyon 0.48 0.36 0.26 0.28 0.31 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.05 0.22 0.20 0.17 114,858,333 Great Sand Dunes 0.34 0.23 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.11 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.15 0.15 0.14 125,300,000 La Garita 0.45 0.32 0.25 0.27 0.28 0.13 0.07 0.05 0.04 0.20 0.18 0.17 106,023,077 Maroon Bells 0.25 0.20 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.10 0.09 0.08 275,660,000 Mesa Verde 2.18 1.89 1.65 1.71 1.77 0.29 0.24 0.18 0.12 0.53 0.47 0.41 47,527,586 Pecos 0.59 0.41 0.34 0.35 0.37 0.18 0.07 0.06 0.04 0.25 0.24 0.22 76,572,222 Petrified Forest 0.44 0.29 0.24 0.26 0.28 0.15 0.05 0.03 0.01 0.20 0.18 0.16 91,886,667 San Pedro 1.04 0.80 0.62 0.65 0.69 0.24 0.18 0.15 0.11 0.42 0.39 0.35 57,429,167 West Elk 0.43 0.33 0.24 0.26 0.28 0.10 0.09 0.07 0.05 0.19 0.17 0.15 137,830,000 Weminuche 0.81 0.63 0.48 0.52 0.57 0.18 0.15 0.11 0.06 0.33 0.29 0.24 76,572,222 Wheeler Peak 0.41 0.30 0.23 0.25 0.27 0.11 0.07 0.05 0.03 0.18 0.16 0.14 125,300,000 

Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data.2. NI = No Improvement3. NA = Not Applicable4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000):

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree $13,783 (Includes LNB/OFA/NN and PJFF)Consent Decree to ROFA/Rotamix $9,648Consent Decree to Rotamix $4,929Consent Decree to ROFA $5,124Pre-Consent Decree to ROFA/Rotamix $10,904Pre-Consent Decree to Rotamix $6,185Pre-Consent Decree to ROFA $6,380
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree (4)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 59 1.92 71.14 23.07 1.46 0.89 1.08 2.36 100

BAND 70 1.31 35.48 59.51 1.32 0.81 0.83 2.06 100

BLCA 40 1.14 52.26 45.03 0.71 0.44 0.43 1.13 100

CANY 80 2.59 65.05 28.99 1.51 0.92 1.08 2.44 100

CARE 31 1.97 51.54 43.71 1.15 0.71 1.06 1.83 100

GRCA 14 1.14 42.20 54.25 0.90 0.55 0.65 1.45 100

GRSA 23 0.85 77.31 14.03 2.38 1.46 1.09 3.75 100

LAGA 35 1.15 42.48 54.54 0.77 0.47 0.50 1.24 100

MABE 16 0.67 41.50 54.30 1.08 0.66 0.76 1.70 100

MEVE 184 4.20 84.29 1.94 3.21 1.97 3.57 5.03 100

PECO 53 1.40 43.19 52.60 1.08 0.66 0.76 1.71 100

PEFO 18 1.13 84.94 9.80 1.30 0.79 1.11 2.06 100

SAPE 111 1.78 79.88 8.73 2.70 1.65 2.83 4.20 100

WEEL 34 0.99 40.76 54.57 1.20 0.73 0.85 1.89 100

WEMI 74 1.51 26.70 66.76 1.53 0.94 1.66 2.40 100

WHPE 37 1.00 32.06 63.10 1.28 0.78 0.76 2.02 100

Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 47 1.69 33.57 62.13 1.88 0.48 0.48 1.46 100

BAND 49 1.04 30.40 66.83 1.26 0.32 0.23 0.97 100

BLCA 26 0.95 37.13 57.66 2.28 0.58 0.58 1.76 100

CANY 67 2.26 55.66 38.57 2.53 0.65 0.62 1.98 100

CARE 28 1.81 52.95 42.68 1.91 0.49 0.48 1.49 100

GRCA 12 0.97 38.14 59.75 0.93 0.24 0.19 0.75 100

GRSA 14 0.63 38.82 54.18 3.18 0.81 0.53 2.47 100

LAGA 20 0.86 38.38 59.80 0.81 0.21 0.15 0.65 100

MABE 10 0.54 69.46 25.41 2.29 0.59 0.43 1.83 100

MEVE 157 3.38 75.39 9.84 6.26 1.60 2.09 4.82 100

PECO 35 1.05 80.51 15.41 1.83 0.47 0.36 1.43 100

PEFO 14 0.82 27.95 69.41 1.18 0.30 0.25 0.92 100

SAPE 93 1.40 39.89 53.93 2.71 0.69 0.68 2.09 100

WEEL 19 0.80 37.76 60.62 0.70 0.18 0.19 0.55 100

WEMI 53 1.15 28.74 65.59 2.44 0.62 0.72 1.88 100

WHPE 27 0.75 30.82 66.18 1.36 0.35 0.23 1.06 100

Rotamix (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 44 1.61 72.81 19.83 3.28 0.84 0.54 2.71 100

BAND 42 0.91 42.35 53.31 1.92 0.49 0.46 1.49 100

BLCA 20 0.84 53.56 41.60 2.14 0.55 0.46 1.70 100

CANY 63 2.13 73.54 22.85 1.60 0.41 0.34 1.27 100

CARE 27 1.62 59.78 35.30 2.16 0.55 0.54 1.68 100

GRCA 11 0.84 44.44 53.10 1.09 0.28 0.22 0.87 100

GRSA 10 0.57 82.01 11.72 2.88 0.74 0.39 2.25 100

LAGA 14 0.74 33.33 61.80 2.16 0.55 0.48 1.68 100

MABE 7 0.50 45.94 50.47 1.61 0.41 0.29 1.27 100

MEVE 153 3.35 76.19 8.88 6.33 1.62 2.11 4.87 100

PECO 30 0.88 49.12 47.72 1.41 0.36 0.28 1.11 100

PEFO 13 0.77 88.60 7.79 1.58 0.40 0.38 1.24 100

SAPE 85 1.30 76.93 16.40 2.88 0.74 0.83 2.22 100

WEEL 16 0.73 43.95 54.37 0.76 0.19 0.13 0.60 100

WEMI 42 1.03 90.48 1.83 3.42 0.87 0.73 2.67 100

WHPE 20 0.68 81.21 12.88 2.65 0.68 0.51 2.07 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree (4)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 59 1.92 71.14 23.07 1.46 0.89 1.08 2.36 100

BAND 70 1.31 35.48 59.51 1.32 0.81 0.83 2.06 100

BLCA 40 1.14 52.26 45.03 0.71 0.44 0.43 1.13 100

CANY 80 2.59 65.05 28.99 1.51 0.92 1.08 2.44 100

CARE 31 1.97 51.54 43.71 1.15 0.71 1.06 1.83 100

GRCA 14 1.14 42.20 54.25 0.90 0.55 0.65 1.45 100

GRSA 23 0.85 77.31 14.03 2.38 1.46 1.09 3.75 100

LAGA 35 1.15 42.48 54.54 0.77 0.47 0.50 1.24 100

MABE 16 0.67 41.50 54.30 1.08 0.66 0.76 1.70 100

MEVE 184 4.20 84.29 1.94 3.21 1.97 3.57 5.03 100

PECO 53 1.40 43.19 52.60 1.08 0.66 0.76 1.71 100

PEFO 18 1.13 84.94 9.80 1.30 0.79 1.11 2.06 100

SAPE 111 1.78 79.88 8.73 2.70 1.65 2.83 4.20 100

WEEL 34 0.99 40.76 54.57 1.20 0.73 0.85 1.89 100

WEMI 74 1.51 26.70 66.76 1.53 0.94 1.66 2.40 100

WHPE 37 1.00 32.06 63.10 1.28 0.78 0.76 2.02 100

Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 47 1.69 33.57 62.13 1.88 0.48 0.48 1.46 100

BAND 49 1.04 30.40 66.83 1.26 0.32 0.23 0.97 100

BLCA 26 0.95 37.13 57.66 2.28 0.58 0.58 1.76 100

CANY 67 2.26 55.66 38.57 2.53 0.65 0.62 1.98 100

CARE 28 1.81 52.95 42.68 1.91 0.49 0.48 1.49 100

GRCA 12 0.97 38.14 59.75 0.93 0.24 0.19 0.75 100

GRSA 14 0.63 38.82 54.18 3.18 0.81 0.53 2.47 100

LAGA 20 0.86 38.38 59.80 0.81 0.21 0.15 0.65 100

MABE 10 0.54 69.46 25.41 2.29 0.59 0.43 1.83 100

MEVE 157 3.38 75.39 9.84 6.26 1.60 2.09 4.82 100

PECO 35 1.05 80.51 15.41 1.83 0.47 0.36 1.43 100

PEFO 14 0.82 27.95 69.41 1.18 0.30 0.25 0.92 100

SAPE 93 1.40 39.89 53.93 2.71 0.69 0.68 2.09 100

WEEL 19 0.80 37.76 60.62 0.70 0.18 0.19 0.55 100

WEMI 53 1.15 28.74 65.59 2.44 0.62 0.72 1.88 100

WHPE 27 0.75 30.82 66.18 1.36 0.35 0.23 1.06 100

ROFA/Rotamix (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 43 1.58 74.14 18.36 3.34 0.85 0.55 2.76 100

BAND 42 0.88 35.70 59.75 2.08 0.53 0.33 1.61 100

BLCA 18 0.82 54.95 40.08 2.19 0.56 0.47 1.75 100

CANY 62 2.10 74.97 21.34 1.63 0.42 0.35 1.29 100

CARE 27 1.55 62.41 32.45 2.25 0.58 0.56 1.75 100

GRCA 11 0.79 47.12 50.27 1.15 0.29 0.24 0.92 100

GRSA 9 0.56 83.34 10.29 2.93 0.75 0.40 2.29 100

LAGA 13 0.68 36.28 58.42 2.35 0.60 0.52 1.82 100

MABE 4 0.47 36.99 59.09 1.75 0.45 0.37 1.35 100

MEVE 151 3.34 76.56 8.44 6.36 1.62 2.12 4.90 100

PECO 24 0.82 67.42 28.63 1.76 0.45 0.37 1.37 100

PEFO 12 0.73 38.79 58.64 1.11 0.28 0.31 0.86 100

SAPE 84 1.28 78.09 15.14 2.92 0.75 0.85 2.25 100

WEEL 13 0.69 46.55 51.67 0.81 0.21 0.13 0.63 100

WEMI 41 0.97 37.21 57.74 2.21 0.56 0.57 1.71 100

WHPE 18 0.65 72.83 21.74 2.42 0.62 0.51 1.88 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree (4)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 59 1.92 71.14 23.07 1.46 0.89 1.08 2.36 100

BAND 70 1.31 35.48 59.51 1.32 0.81 0.83 2.06 100

BLCA 40 1.14 52.26 45.03 0.71 0.44 0.43 1.13 100

CANY 80 2.59 65.05 28.99 1.51 0.92 1.08 2.44 100

CARE 31 1.97 51.54 43.71 1.15 0.71 1.06 1.83 100

GRCA 14 1.14 42.20 54.25 0.90 0.55 0.65 1.45 100

GRSA 23 0.85 77.31 14.03 2.38 1.46 1.09 3.75 100

LAGA 35 1.15 42.48 54.54 0.77 0.47 0.50 1.24 100

MABE 16 0.67 41.50 54.30 1.08 0.66 0.76 1.70 100

MEVE 184 4.20 84.29 1.94 3.21 1.97 3.57 5.03 100

PECO 53 1.40 43.19 52.60 1.08 0.66 0.76 1.71 100

PEFO 18 1.13 84.94 9.80 1.30 0.79 1.11 2.06 100

SAPE 111 1.78 79.88 8.73 2.70 1.65 2.83 4.20 100

WEEL 34 0.99 40.76 54.57 1.20 0.73 0.85 1.89 100

WEMI 74 1.51 26.70 66.76 1.53 0.94 1.66 2.40 100

WHPE 37 1.00 32.06 63.10 1.28 0.78 0.76 2.02 100

Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 47 1.69 33.57 62.13 1.88 0.48 0.48 1.46 100

BAND 49 1.04 30.40 66.83 1.26 0.32 0.23 0.97 100

BLCA 26 0.95 37.13 57.66 2.28 0.58 0.58 1.76 100

CANY 67 2.26 55.66 38.57 2.53 0.65 0.62 1.98 100

CARE 28 1.81 52.95 42.68 1.91 0.49 0.48 1.49 100

GRCA 12 0.97 38.14 59.75 0.93 0.24 0.19 0.75 100

GRSA 14 0.63 38.82 54.18 3.18 0.81 0.53 2.47 100

LAGA 20 0.86 38.38 59.80 0.81 0.21 0.15 0.65 100

MABE 10 0.54 69.46 25.41 2.29 0.59 0.43 1.83 100

MEVE 157 3.38 75.39 9.84 6.26 1.60 2.09 4.82 100

PECO 35 1.05 80.51 15.41 1.83 0.47 0.36 1.43 100

PEFO 14 0.82 27.95 69.41 1.18 0.30 0.25 0.92 100

SAPE 93 1.40 39.89 53.93 2.71 0.69 0.68 2.09 100

WEEL 19 0.80 37.76 60.62 0.70 0.18 0.19 0.55 100

WEMI 53 1.15 28.74 65.59 2.44 0.62 0.72 1.88 100

WHPE 27 0.75 30.82 66.18 1.36 0.35 0.23 1.06 100

ROFA (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 45 1.63 71.63 21.12 3.22 0.82 0.53 2.66 100

BAND 45 0.94 40.98 54.81 1.85 0.47 0.44 1.44 100

BLCA 21 0.86 52.42 42.84 2.09 0.53 0.45 1.67 100

CANY 64 2.17 72.23 24.21 1.57 0.40 0.34 1.25 100

CARE 27 1.68 57.45 37.82 2.08 0.53 0.52 1.61 100

GRCA 11 0.88 42.20 55.46 1.03 0.26 0.21 0.83 100

GRSA 12 0.58 80.71 13.12 2.84 0.73 0.39 2.22 100

LAGA 14 0.79 30.85 64.65 2.00 0.51 0.45 1.55 100

MABE 8 0.52 43.59 53.00 1.53 0.39 0.27 1.21 100

MEVE 155 3.36 75.90 9.23 6.30 1.61 2.10 4.85 100

PECO 31 0.93 46.24 50.79 1.33 0.34 0.26 1.04 100

PEFO 13 0.78 87.66 8.77 1.56 0.40 0.38 1.23 100

SAPE 87 1.32 75.88 17.54 2.84 0.73 0.82 2.19 100

WEEL 16 0.74 86.11 7.90 2.67 0.68 0.49 2.14 100

WEMI 47 1.05 31.86 61.86 2.70 0.69 0.80 2.08 100

WHPE 22 0.70 51.18 44.25 2.05 0.52 0.40 1.60 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree (4)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 46 1.76 43.87 46.41 2.37 1.45 2.20 3.70 100

BAND 87 1.86 44.28 49.89 1.45 0.89 1.18 2.31 100

BLCA 54 1.34 35.37 59.23 1.36 0.83 1.04 2.17 100

CANY 67 2.04 83.50 1.79 3.67 2.25 3.05 5.74 100

CARE 24 1.16 33.88 63.47 0.67 0.41 0.49 1.09 100

GRCA 15 0.93 89.85 2.03 2.09 1.28 1.45 3.30 100

GRSA 28 1.00 82.39 12.99 1.20 0.73 0.78 1.90 100

LAGA 63 1.30 81.37 13.32 1.40 0.86 0.81 2.24 100

MABE 20 0.78 28.96 63.27 2.15 1.32 0.80 3.49 100

MEVE 184 4.09 34.40 60.73 1.18 0.72 1.11 1.87 100

PECO 62 1.33 53.02 40.33 1.81 1.11 0.89 2.85 100

PEFO 16 0.79 90.95 1.94 1.81 1.11 1.31 2.89 100

SAPE 125 2.37 71.74 23.38 1.23 0.75 0.94 1.96 100

WEEL 43 1.15 35.15 60.78 1.03 0.63 0.76 1.65 100

WEMI 117 1.85 57.89 29.83 2.89 1.77 3.13 4.49 100

WHPE 40 0.95 55.69 38.20 1.67 1.02 0.74 2.67 100

Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 32 1.65 49.70 47.38 1.28 0.33 0.30 1.01 100

BAND 61 1.56 37.39 59.91 1.19 0.30 0.27 0.93 100

BLCA 30 1.15 31.11 65.99 1.28 0.33 0.28 1.02 100

CANY 57 1.73 52.51 43.96 1.55 0.40 0.35 1.23 100

CARE 18 0.82 91.30 1.66 3.11 0.79 0.69 2.46 100

GRCA 10 0.76 44.30 54.26 0.64 0.16 0.12 0.52 100

GRSA 17 0.71 28.48 69.87 0.74 0.19 0.13 0.60 100

LAGA 40 0.94 26.32 71.29 1.07 0.27 0.22 0.84 100

MABE 11 0.56 84.39 12.71 1.31 0.33 0.23 1.03 100

MEVE 162 3.53 85.08 5.44 4.14 1.06 1.04 3.24 100

PECO 41 1.09 41.87 56.64 0.66 0.17 0.13 0.53 100

PEFO 9 0.60 28.65 69.64 0.76 0.19 0.13 0.62 100

SAPE 109 2.01 46.15 47.36 2.82 0.72 0.76 2.19 100

WEEL 24 0.91 30.66 67.44 0.86 0.22 0.14 0.68 100

WEMI 83 1.48 57.20 35.77 3.02 0.77 0.91 2.32 100

WHPE 20 0.86 47.51 47.27 2.35 0.60 0.43 1.84 100

Rotamix (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 30 1.49 41.03 53.51 2.38 0.61 0.62 1.85 100

BAND 50 1.35 41.58 51.66 2.97 0.76 0.73 2.29 100

BLCA 26 0.98 39.93 57.72 1.06 0.27 0.17 0.84 100

CANY 50 1.60 44.84 50.30 2.09 0.53 0.62 1.62 100

CARE 13 0.71 40.05 57.91 0.90 0.23 0.19 0.73 100

GRCA 10 0.64 52.99 45.29 0.76 0.19 0.14 0.63 100

GRSA 10 0.61 35.16 60.88 1.78 0.45 0.33 1.39 100

LAGA 22 0.79 33.99 59.77 2.77 0.71 0.62 2.14 100

MABE 6 0.47 36.12 61.24 1.17 0.30 0.23 0.93 100

MEVE 157 3.21 78.44 9.96 4.96 1.27 1.54 3.84 100

PECO 34 0.92 50.34 47.87 0.80 0.20 0.16 0.63 100

PEFO 8 0.54 36.19 60.97 1.27 0.32 0.21 1.04 100

SAPE 95 1.77 41.15 53.49 2.34 0.60 0.59 1.83 100

WEEL 20 0.76 42.88 51.47 2.54 0.65 0.48 1.99 100

WEMI 60 1.32 40.77 57.10 0.93 0.24 0.23 0.73 100

WHPE 17 0.75 38.81 59.44 0.78 0.20 0.15 0.62 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree (4)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 46 1.76 43.87 46.41 2.37 1.45 2.20 3.70 100

BAND 87 1.86 44.28 49.89 1.45 0.89 1.18 2.31 100

BLCA 54 1.34 35.37 59.23 1.36 0.83 1.04 2.17 100

CANY 67 2.04 83.50 1.79 3.67 2.25 3.05 5.74 100

CARE 24 1.16 33.88 63.47 0.67 0.41 0.49 1.09 100

GRCA 15 0.93 89.85 2.03 2.09 1.28 1.45 3.30 100

GRSA 28 1.00 82.39 12.99 1.20 0.73 0.78 1.90 100

LAGA 63 1.30 81.37 13.32 1.40 0.86 0.81 2.24 100

MABE 20 0.78 28.96 63.27 2.15 1.32 0.80 3.49 100

MEVE 184 4.09 34.40 60.73 1.18 0.72 1.11 1.87 100

PECO 62 1.33 53.02 40.33 1.81 1.11 0.89 2.85 100

PEFO 16 0.79 90.95 1.94 1.81 1.11 1.31 2.89 100

SAPE 125 2.37 71.74 23.38 1.23 0.75 0.94 1.96 100

WEEL 43 1.15 35.15 60.78 1.03 0.63 0.76 1.65 100

WEMI 117 1.85 57.89 29.83 2.89 1.77 3.13 4.49 100

WHPE 40 0.95 55.69 38.20 1.67 1.02 0.74 2.67 100

Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 32 1.65 49.70 47.38 1.28 0.33 0.30 1.01 100

BAND 61 1.56 37.39 59.91 1.19 0.30 0.27 0.93 100

BLCA 30 1.15 31.11 65.99 1.28 0.33 0.28 1.02 100

CANY 57 1.73 52.51 43.96 1.55 0.40 0.35 1.23 100

CARE 18 0.82 91.30 1.66 3.11 0.79 0.69 2.46 100

GRCA 10 0.76 44.30 54.26 0.64 0.16 0.12 0.52 100

GRSA 17 0.71 28.48 69.87 0.74 0.19 0.13 0.60 100

LAGA 40 0.94 26.32 71.29 1.07 0.27 0.22 0.84 100

MABE 11 0.56 84.39 12.71 1.31 0.33 0.23 1.03 100

MEVE 162 3.53 85.08 5.44 4.14 1.06 1.04 3.24 100

PECO 41 1.09 41.87 56.64 0.66 0.17 0.13 0.53 100

PEFO 9 0.60 28.65 69.64 0.76 0.19 0.13 0.62 100

SAPE 109 2.01 46.15 47.36 2.82 0.72 0.76 2.19 100

WEEL 24 0.91 30.66 67.44 0.86 0.22 0.14 0.68 100

WEMI 83 1.48 57.20 35.77 3.02 0.77 0.91 2.32 100

WHPE 20 0.86 47.51 47.27 2.35 0.60 0.43 1.84 100

ROFA/Rotamix (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 29 1.40 43.16 54.28 1.12 0.29 0.24 0.90 100

BAND 49 1.28 46.28 50.38 1.47 0.38 0.33 1.15 100

BLCA 25 0.91 42.83 54.65 1.14 0.29 0.18 0.90 100

CANY 50 1.55 46.31 48.67 2.16 0.55 0.64 1.67 100

CARE 13 0.65 43.30 54.49 0.97 0.25 0.20 0.79 100

GRCA 10 0.63 92.98 1.42 2.50 0.64 0.50 1.96 100

GRSA 10 0.60 90.60 5.80 1.63 0.42 0.26 1.29 100

LAGA 17 0.74 36.39 56.87 2.99 0.76 0.67 2.30 100

MABE 6 0.44 39.30 54.01 3.09 0.79 0.33 2.48 100

MEVE 157 3.18 79.12 9.17 5.01 1.28 1.55 3.87 100

PECO 29 0.86 53.65 44.44 0.85 0.22 0.17 0.68 100

PEFO 7 0.50 39.28 57.64 1.38 0.35 0.22 1.13 100

SAPE 92 1.67 56.84 35.88 3.18 0.81 0.84 2.46 100

WEEL 18 0.71 45.88 48.07 2.72 0.69 0.51 2.12 100

WEMI 58 1.24 61.67 35.82 1.11 0.28 0.22 0.90 100

WHPE 14 0.69 42.02 56.08 0.85 0.22 0.17 0.67 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree (4)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 46 1.76 43.87 46.41 2.37 1.45 2.20 3.70 100

BAND 87 1.86 44.28 49.89 1.45 0.89 1.18 2.31 100

BLCA 54 1.34 35.37 59.23 1.36 0.83 1.04 2.17 100

CANY 67 2.04 83.50 1.79 3.67 2.25 3.05 5.74 100

CARE 24 1.16 33.88 63.47 0.67 0.41 0.49 1.09 100

GRCA 15 0.93 89.85 2.03 2.09 1.28 1.45 3.30 100

GRSA 28 1.00 82.39 12.99 1.20 0.73 0.78 1.90 100

LAGA 63 1.30 81.37 13.32 1.40 0.86 0.81 2.24 100

MABE 20 0.78 28.96 63.27 2.15 1.32 0.80 3.49 100

MEVE 184 4.09 34.40 60.73 1.18 0.72 1.11 1.87 100

PECO 62 1.33 53.02 40.33 1.81 1.11 0.89 2.85 100

PEFO 16 0.79 90.95 1.94 1.81 1.11 1.31 2.89 100

SAPE 125 2.37 71.74 23.38 1.23 0.75 0.94 1.96 100

WEEL 43 1.15 35.15 60.78 1.03 0.63 0.76 1.65 100

WEMI 117 1.85 57.89 29.83 2.89 1.77 3.13 4.49 100

WHPE 40 0.95 55.69 38.20 1.67 1.02 0.74 2.67 100

Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 32 1.65 49.70 47.38 1.28 0.33 0.30 1.01 100

BAND 61 1.56 37.39 59.91 1.19 0.30 0.27 0.93 100

BLCA 30 1.15 31.11 65.99 1.28 0.33 0.28 1.02 100

CANY 57 1.73 52.51 43.96 1.55 0.40 0.35 1.23 100

CARE 18 0.82 91.30 1.66 3.11 0.79 0.69 2.46 100

GRCA 10 0.76 44.30 54.26 0.64 0.16 0.12 0.52 100

GRSA 17 0.71 28.48 69.87 0.74 0.19 0.13 0.60 100

LAGA 40 0.94 26.32 71.29 1.07 0.27 0.22 0.84 100

MABE 11 0.56 84.39 12.71 1.31 0.33 0.23 1.03 100

MEVE 162 3.53 85.08 5.44 4.14 1.06 1.04 3.24 100

PECO 41 1.09 41.87 56.64 0.66 0.17 0.13 0.53 100

PEFO 9 0.60 28.65 69.64 0.76 0.19 0.13 0.62 100

SAPE 109 2.01 46.15 47.36 2.82 0.72 0.76 2.19 100

WEEL 24 0.91 30.66 67.44 0.86 0.22 0.14 0.68 100

WEMI 83 1.48 57.20 35.77 3.02 0.77 0.91 2.32 100

WHPE 20 0.86 47.51 47.27 2.35 0.60 0.43 1.84 100

ROFA (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 30 1.53 41.09 54.91 1.75 0.45 0.43 1.37 100

BAND 52 1.41 47.94 48.13 1.74 0.44 0.39 1.37 100

BLCA 27 1.04 37.51 60.28 1.00 0.25 0.16 0.79 100

CANY 52 1.64 55.52 40.75 1.64 0.42 0.37 1.30 100

CARE 14 0.76 37.26 60.84 0.84 0.21 0.17 0.68 100

GRCA 10 0.68 50.03 48.35 0.72 0.18 0.13 0.59 100

GRSA 11 0.65 32.60 63.73 1.65 0.42 0.31 1.29 100

LAGA 29 0.83 31.97 62.22 2.59 0.66 0.58 1.99 100

MABE 8 0.51 33.43 64.13 1.09 0.28 0.21 0.86 100

MEVE 158 3.23 77.81 10.68 4.92 1.26 1.53 3.81 100

PECO 35 0.97 47.44 50.88 0.75 0.19 0.15 0.60 100

PEFO 9 0.55 93.49 1.68 2.15 0.55 0.44 1.70 100

SAPE 102 1.86 50.36 42.56 3.08 0.79 0.82 2.39 100

WEEL 22 0.80 35.09 62.73 0.98 0.25 0.16 0.78 100

WEMI 65 1.36 63.95 19.46 7.08 1.81 2.25 5.45 100

WHPE 18 0.79 51.48 42.87 2.55 0.65 0.46 1.99 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree (4)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 39 1.82 38.16 50.64 2.67 1.63 2.75 4.15 100

BAND 77 1.51 40.84 49.83 2.33 1.43 1.94 3.63 100

BLCA 30 1.40 29.26 67.79 0.76 0.46 0.52 1.21 100

CANY 57 2.00 64.92 31.30 0.94 0.58 0.72 1.53 100

CARE 25 1.34 43.68 49.81 1.57 0.96 1.51 2.47 100

GRCA 11 0.81 91.83 0.94 1.83 1.12 1.34 2.94 100

GRSA 26 0.82 50.03 45.62 1.12 0.68 0.79 1.76 100

LAGA 40 1.14 25.27 67.60 2.02 1.24 0.66 3.22 100

MABE 15 0.63 36.60 57.88 1.53 0.94 0.65 2.41 100

MEVE 174 4.85 69.32 17.06 3.27 2.00 3.22 5.14 100

PECO 63 1.26 49.00 43.40 1.87 1.15 1.66 2.93 100

PEFO 17 0.74 88.02 6.36 1.46 0.90 0.89 2.36 100

SAPE 127 1.96 80.84 9.41 2.36 1.45 2.22 3.73 100

WEEL 31 0.94 25.57 71.56 0.70 0.43 0.61 1.12 100

WEMI 87 1.69 40.63 54.52 1.17 0.72 1.13 1.84 100

WHPE 48 1.05 48.42 48.68 0.78 0.48 0.39 1.25 100

Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 27 1.49 30.95 67.01 0.89 0.23 0.21 0.71 100

BAND 57 1.20 77.97 17.21 2.11 0.54 0.52 1.65 100

BLCA 21 1.07 27.98 70.17 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.65 100

CANY 48 1.68 70.45 24.81 2.07 0.53 0.49 1.65 100

CARE 23 1.05 52.60 45.24 0.94 0.24 0.20 0.77 100

GRCA 9 0.57 93.89 1.17 2.19 0.56 0.46 1.74 100

GRSA 15 0.64 27.42 70.94 0.76 0.19 0.09 0.60 100

LAGA 28 0.90 23.76 71.98 1.99 0.51 0.18 1.58 100

MABE 8 0.51 27.63 69.59 1.22 0.31 0.28 0.97 100

MEVE 159 3.80 41.19 53.18 2.41 0.62 0.72 1.88 100

PECO 50 1.00 51.25 46.75 0.89 0.23 0.18 0.70 100

PEFO 9 0.53 32.43 65.01 1.15 0.29 0.18 0.93 100

SAPE 97 1.56 37.04 56.49 2.78 0.71 0.83 2.15 100

WEEL 22 0.83 28.10 67.91 1.74 0.44 0.44 1.36 100

WEMI 63 1.34 36.23 61.45 1.00 0.26 0.29 0.77 100

WHPE 27 0.89 91.09 5.38 1.60 0.41 0.26 1.25 100

Rotamix (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 24 1.27 75.89 21.42 1.18 0.30 0.26 0.94 100

BAND 49 1.14 82.29 12.61 2.23 0.57 0.55 1.74 100

BLCA 18 0.96 45.73 49.82 1.94 0.50 0.50 1.52 100

CANY 43 1.60 74.16 20.85 2.18 0.56 0.51 1.74 100

CARE 21 0.98 49.83 47.77 1.05 0.27 0.25 0.84 100

GRCA 8 0.57 94.24 0.81 2.19 0.56 0.46 1.74 100

GRSA 10 0.51 27.65 70.10 0.98 0.25 0.24 0.77 100

LAGA 14 0.77 54.10 42.54 1.49 0.38 0.34 1.16 100

MABE 6 0.43 33.03 63.63 1.46 0.37 0.34 1.16 100

MEVE 156 3.58 82.06 0.90 7.26 1.85 2.36 5.58 100

PECO 40 0.91 47.63 48.61 1.70 0.43 0.30 1.33 100

PEFO 6 0.50 90.98 5.08 1.76 0.45 0.31 1.41 100

SAPE 90 1.47 84.37 8.84 2.95 0.75 0.79 2.30 100

WEEL 14 0.69 33.89 61.30 2.10 0.54 0.53 1.64 100

WEMI 54 1.14 37.46 59.26 1.46 0.37 0.30 1.15 100

WHPE 22 0.74 37.08 59.00 1.77 0.45 0.29 1.40 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree (4)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 39 1.82 38.16 50.64 2.67 1.63 2.75 4.15 100

BAND 77 1.51 40.84 49.83 2.33 1.43 1.94 3.63 100

BLCA 30 1.40 29.26 67.79 0.76 0.46 0.52 1.21 100

CANY 57 2.00 64.92 31.30 0.94 0.58 0.72 1.53 100

CARE 25 1.34 43.68 49.81 1.57 0.96 1.51 2.47 100

GRCA 11 0.81 91.83 0.94 1.83 1.12 1.34 2.94 100

GRSA 26 0.82 50.03 45.62 1.12 0.68 0.79 1.76 100

LAGA 40 1.14 25.27 67.60 2.02 1.24 0.66 3.22 100

MABE 15 0.63 36.60 57.88 1.53 0.94 0.65 2.41 100

MEVE 174 4.85 69.32 17.06 3.27 2.00 3.22 5.14 100

PECO 63 1.26 49.00 43.40 1.87 1.15 1.66 2.93 100

PEFO 17 0.74 88.02 6.36 1.46 0.90 0.89 2.36 100

SAPE 127 1.96 80.84 9.41 2.36 1.45 2.22 3.73 100

WEEL 31 0.94 25.57 71.56 0.70 0.43 0.61 1.12 100

WEMI 87 1.69 40.63 54.52 1.17 0.72 1.13 1.84 100

WHPE 48 1.05 48.42 48.68 0.78 0.48 0.39 1.25 100

Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 27 1.49 30.95 67.01 0.89 0.23 0.21 0.71 100

BAND 57 1.20 77.97 17.21 2.11 0.54 0.52 1.65 100

BLCA 21 1.07 27.98 70.17 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.65 100

CANY 48 1.68 70.45 24.81 2.07 0.53 0.49 1.65 100

CARE 23 1.05 52.60 45.24 0.94 0.24 0.20 0.77 100

GRCA 9 0.57 93.89 1.17 2.19 0.56 0.46 1.74 100

GRSA 15 0.64 27.42 70.94 0.76 0.19 0.09 0.60 100

LAGA 28 0.90 23.76 71.98 1.99 0.51 0.18 1.58 100

MABE 8 0.51 27.63 69.59 1.22 0.31 0.28 0.97 100

MEVE 159 3.80 41.19 53.18 2.41 0.62 0.72 1.88 100

PECO 50 1.00 51.25 46.75 0.89 0.23 0.18 0.70 100

PEFO 9 0.53 32.43 65.01 1.15 0.29 0.18 0.93 100

SAPE 97 1.56 37.04 56.49 2.78 0.71 0.83 2.15 100

WEEL 22 0.83 28.10 67.91 1.74 0.44 0.44 1.36 100

WEMI 63 1.34 36.23 61.45 1.00 0.26 0.29 0.77 100

WHPE 27 0.89 91.09 5.38 1.60 0.41 0.26 1.25 100

ROFA/Rotamix (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 24 1.25 77.67 19.58 1.21 0.31 0.26 0.97 100

BAND 47 1.08 33.00 60.40 2.93 0.75 0.68 2.25 100

BLCA 18 0.93 47.21 48.19 2.00 0.51 0.51 1.57 100

CANY 42 1.57 51.69 37.85 4.46 1.14 1.43 3.43 100

CARE 20 0.93 52.85 44.60 1.11 0.28 0.26 0.89 100

GRCA 8 0.56 63.87 33.17 1.30 0.33 0.27 1.05 100

GRSA 6 0.48 92.42 4.29 1.50 0.38 0.24 1.17 100

LAGA 12 0.71 30.67 63.78 2.57 0.66 0.24 2.10 100

MABE 5 0.40 35.46 60.97 1.57 0.40 0.37 1.24 100

MEVE 154 3.58 82.14 0.80 7.26 1.86 2.36 5.58 100

PECO 37 0.88 65.41 27.63 3.08 0.79 0.68 2.41 100

PEFO 6 0.49 80.66 15.11 1.89 0.48 0.33 1.52 100

SAPE 90 1.45 56.13 38.49 2.31 0.59 0.69 1.78 100

WEEL 13 0.65 36.43 58.41 2.26 0.58 0.57 1.76 100

WEMI 53 1.07 54.55 41.81 1.57 0.40 0.46 1.21 100

WHPE 21 0.70 39.12 56.75 1.87 0.48 0.31 1.47 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree (4)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 39 1.82 38.16 50.64 2.67 1.63 2.75 4.15 100

BAND 77 1.51 40.84 49.83 2.33 1.43 1.94 3.63 100

BLCA 30 1.40 29.26 67.79 0.76 0.46 0.52 1.21 100

CANY 57 2.00 64.92 31.30 0.94 0.58 0.72 1.53 100

CARE 25 1.34 43.68 49.81 1.57 0.96 1.51 2.47 100

GRCA 11 0.81 91.83 0.94 1.83 1.12 1.34 2.94 100

GRSA 26 0.82 50.03 45.62 1.12 0.68 0.79 1.76 100

LAGA 40 1.14 25.27 67.60 2.02 1.24 0.66 3.22 100

MABE 15 0.63 36.60 57.88 1.53 0.94 0.65 2.41 100

MEVE 174 4.85 69.32 17.06 3.27 2.00 3.22 5.14 100

PECO 63 1.26 49.00 43.40 1.87 1.15 1.66 2.93 100

PEFO 17 0.74 88.02 6.36 1.46 0.90 0.89 2.36 100

SAPE 127 1.96 80.84 9.41 2.36 1.45 2.22 3.73 100

WEEL 31 0.94 25.57 71.56 0.70 0.43 0.61 1.12 100

WEMI 87 1.69 40.63 54.52 1.17 0.72 1.13 1.84 100

WHPE 48 1.05 48.42 48.68 0.78 0.48 0.39 1.25 100

Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 27 1.49 30.95 67.01 0.89 0.23 0.21 0.71 100

BAND 57 1.20 77.97 17.21 2.11 0.54 0.52 1.65 100

BLCA 21 1.07 27.98 70.17 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.65 100

CANY 48 1.68 70.45 24.81 2.07 0.53 0.49 1.65 100

CARE 23 1.05 52.60 45.24 0.94 0.24 0.20 0.77 100

GRCA 9 0.57 93.89 1.17 2.19 0.56 0.46 1.74 100

GRSA 15 0.64 27.42 70.94 0.76 0.19 0.09 0.60 100

LAGA 28 0.90 23.76 71.98 1.99 0.51 0.18 1.58 100

MABE 8 0.51 27.63 69.59 1.22 0.31 0.28 0.97 100

MEVE 159 3.80 41.19 53.18 2.41 0.62 0.72 1.88 100

PECO 50 1.00 51.25 46.75 0.89 0.23 0.18 0.70 100

PEFO 9 0.53 32.43 65.01 1.15 0.29 0.18 0.93 100

SAPE 97 1.56 37.04 56.49 2.78 0.71 0.83 2.15 100

WEEL 22 0.83 28.10 67.91 1.74 0.44 0.44 1.36 100

WEMI 63 1.34 36.23 61.45 1.00 0.26 0.29 0.77 100

WHPE 27 0.89 91.09 5.38 1.60 0.41 0.26 1.25 100

ROFA (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 26 1.29 36.00 61.62 1.04 0.27 0.25 0.83 100

BAND 53 1.16 80.94 14.04 2.20 0.56 0.54 1.71 100

BLCA 18 0.98 44.54 51.13 1.89 0.48 0.48 1.48 100

CANY 45 1.63 72.89 22.21 2.14 0.55 0.51 1.71 100

CARE 22 1.04 47.25 50.47 0.99 0.25 0.23 0.80 100

GRCA 9 0.57 94.13 0.92 2.19 0.56 0.46 1.74 100

GRSA 11 0.54 28.58 67.16 1.90 0.48 0.41 1.47 100

LAGA 18 0.80 51.93 44.84 1.43 0.36 0.32 1.11 100

MABE 6 0.46 31.08 65.79 1.38 0.35 0.32 1.09 100

MEVE 158 3.59 45.46 48.23 2.71 0.69 0.81 2.10 100

PECO 41 0.92 72.69 24.19 1.41 0.36 0.24 1.11 100

PEFO 8 0.50 90.35 5.73 1.75 0.45 0.31 1.40 100

SAPE 92 1.49 83.45 9.84 2.91 0.74 0.78 2.27 100

WEEL 17 0.74 28.59 69.31 0.91 0.23 0.23 0.72 100

WEMI 57 1.21 34.90 62.04 1.36 0.35 0.28 1.07 100

WHPE 23 0.79 28.01 67.65 1.92 0.49 0.42 1.51 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 16 0.82 25.92 68.87 1.30 0.79 1.06 2.06 100

BAND 1 0.31 41.96 53.16 1.24 0.75 0.94 1.95 100

BLCA 2 0.35 31.77 66.43 0.47 0.29 0.29 0.75 100

CANY 28 1.10 43.62 52.48 0.91 0.55 1.03 1.41 100

CARE 12 0.76 26.38 71.01 0.64 0.38 0.58 1.01 100

GRCA 5 0.31 31.06 66.09 0.72 0.44 0.52 1.17 100

GRSA 0 0.18 87.77 6.73 1.38 0.83 1.12 2.17 100

LAGA 1 0.26 36.35 60.88 0.72 0.44 0.46 1.16 100

MABE 0 0.18 23.69 72.07 1.08 0.65 0.82 1.69 100

MEVE 55 1.51 47.09 35.97 3.88 2.35 4.67 6.04 100

PECO 2 0.29 24.39 68.71 1.72 1.04 1.48 2.67 100

PEFO 2 0.25 84.76 11.37 0.99 0.60 0.69 1.59 100

SAPE 10 0.61 26.56 68.07 1.32 0.80 1.20 2.05 100

WEEL 2 0.27 31.55 66.50 0.52 0.31 0.29 0.82 100

WEMI 3 0.37 22.71 69.34 1.89 1.14 1.99 2.93 100

WHPE 2 0.24 27.68 69.49 0.76 0.46 0.42 1.20 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.69 25.34 71.69 1.31 0.33 0.31 1.03 100

BAND 1 0.24 43.57 53.42 1.34 0.34 0.29 1.04 100

BLCA 2 0.29 23.45 74.26 0.99 0.25 0.26 0.78 100

CANY 22 1.00 38.19 59.52 1.01 0.26 0.23 0.80 100

CARE 11 0.57 26.93 71.52 0.67 0.17 0.17 0.53 100

GRCA 4 0.27 30.85 67.43 0.76 0.19 0.15 0.61 100

GRSA 0 0.14 21.45 76.75 0.80 0.20 0.17 0.63 100

LAGA 0 0.19 28.88 69.14 0.89 0.23 0.16 0.70 100

MABE 0 0.14 20.45 75.64 1.73 0.44 0.40 1.34 100

MEVE 38 1.35 35.69 59.62 2.00 0.51 0.63 1.55 100

PECO 1 0.23 25.62 70.23 1.82 0.47 0.44 1.41 100

PEFO 2 0.19 25.42 72.19 1.06 0.27 0.23 0.84 100

SAPE 7 0.44 27.36 69.47 1.39 0.36 0.35 1.08 100

WEEL 0 0.22 33.65 63.73 1.17 0.30 0.22 0.93 100

WEMI 2 0.31 30.63 61.38 3.48 0.89 0.91 2.70 100

WHPE 2 0.19 28.38 69.83 0.81 0.21 0.13 0.64 100

Rotamix (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 12 0.56 31.25 65.08 1.61 0.41 0.38 1.27 100

BAND 1 0.20 32.57 63.38 1.85 0.47 0.29 1.43 100

BLCA 1 0.22 30.31 66.73 1.28 0.33 0.34 1.00 100

CANY 18 0.85 43.20 54.65 0.95 0.24 0.20 0.76 100

CARE 6 0.45 34.30 63.72 0.86 0.22 0.22 0.68 100

GRCA 2 0.21 38.64 59.21 0.95 0.24 0.19 0.77 100

GRSA 0 0.12 80.85 12.97 2.84 0.73 0.39 2.23 100

LAGA 0 0.16 32.90 62.21 2.16 0.55 0.48 1.69 100

MABE 0 0.11 26.50 68.43 2.24 0.57 0.52 1.74 100

MEVE 31 1.17 54.36 34.96 4.52 1.16 1.50 3.50 100

PECO 0 0.18 33.94 63.34 1.22 0.31 0.22 0.96 100

PEFO 1 0.16 34.18 63.57 0.97 0.25 0.27 0.77 100

SAPE 6 0.35 34.33 61.69 1.75 0.45 0.44 1.35 100

WEEL 0 0.18 41.98 54.76 1.46 0.37 0.27 1.16 100

WEMI 2 0.25 31.02 63.05 2.56 0.65 0.74 1.98 100

WHPE 0 0.16 45.27 52.16 1.16 0.30 0.20 0.91 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 16 0.82 25.92 68.87 1.30 0.79 1.06 2.06 100

BAND 1 0.31 41.96 53.16 1.24 0.75 0.94 1.95 100

BLCA 2 0.35 31.77 66.43 0.47 0.29 0.29 0.75 100

CANY 28 1.10 43.62 52.48 0.91 0.55 1.03 1.41 100

CARE 12 0.76 26.38 71.01 0.64 0.38 0.58 1.01 100

GRCA 5 0.31 31.06 66.09 0.72 0.44 0.52 1.17 100

GRSA 0 0.18 87.77 6.73 1.38 0.83 1.12 2.17 100

LAGA 1 0.26 36.35 60.88 0.72 0.44 0.46 1.16 100

MABE 0 0.18 23.69 72.07 1.08 0.65 0.82 1.69 100

MEVE 55 1.51 47.09 35.97 3.88 2.35 4.67 6.04 100

PECO 2 0.29 24.39 68.71 1.72 1.04 1.48 2.67 100

PEFO 2 0.25 84.76 11.37 0.99 0.60 0.69 1.59 100

SAPE 10 0.61 26.56 68.07 1.32 0.80 1.20 2.05 100

WEEL 2 0.27 31.55 66.50 0.52 0.31 0.29 0.82 100

WEMI 3 0.37 22.71 69.34 1.89 1.14 1.99 2.93 100

WHPE 2 0.24 27.68 69.49 0.76 0.46 0.42 1.20 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.69 25.34 71.69 1.31 0.33 0.31 1.03 100

BAND 1 0.24 43.57 53.42 1.34 0.34 0.29 1.04 100

BLCA 2 0.29 23.45 74.26 0.99 0.25 0.26 0.78 100

CANY 22 1.00 38.19 59.52 1.01 0.26 0.23 0.80 100

CARE 11 0.57 26.93 71.52 0.67 0.17 0.17 0.53 100

GRCA 4 0.27 30.85 67.43 0.76 0.19 0.15 0.61 100

GRSA 0 0.14 21.45 76.75 0.80 0.20 0.17 0.63 100

LAGA 0 0.19 28.88 69.14 0.89 0.23 0.16 0.70 100

MABE 0 0.14 20.45 75.64 1.73 0.44 0.40 1.34 100

MEVE 38 1.35 35.69 59.62 2.00 0.51 0.63 1.55 100

PECO 1 0.23 25.62 70.23 1.82 0.47 0.44 1.41 100

PEFO 2 0.19 25.42 72.19 1.06 0.27 0.23 0.84 100

SAPE 7 0.44 27.36 69.47 1.39 0.36 0.35 1.08 100

WEEL 0 0.22 33.65 63.73 1.17 0.30 0.22 0.93 100

WEMI 2 0.31 30.63 61.38 3.48 0.89 0.91 2.70 100

WHPE 2 0.19 28.38 69.83 0.81 0.21 0.13 0.64 100

ROFA/Rotamix (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.52 33.84 62.18 1.75 0.45 0.41 1.37 100

BAND 1 0.18 34.57 62.39 1.35 0.35 0.29 1.06 100

BLCA 1 0.20 33.22 63.54 1.41 0.36 0.37 1.10 100

CANY 17 0.80 46.44 51.25 1.02 0.26 0.22 0.81 100

CARE 5 0.41 37.41 60.43 0.93 0.24 0.24 0.74 100

GRCA 2 0.20 41.85 55.82 1.03 0.26 0.21 0.83 100

GRSA 0 0.11 48.84 47.95 1.45 0.37 0.24 1.14 100

LAGA 0 0.15 35.88 58.79 2.36 0.60 0.53 1.84 100

MABE 0 0.10 29.10 65.34 2.46 0.63 0.57 1.91 100

MEVE 29 1.13 56.21 32.75 4.67 1.20 1.56 3.62 100

PECO 0 0.17 51.47 45.22 1.48 0.38 0.29 1.16 100

PEFO 1 0.16 89.30 7.04 1.60 0.41 0.39 1.26 100

SAPE 4 0.32 37.25 58.43 1.90 0.49 0.47 1.47 100

WEEL 0 0.17 45.31 51.16 1.58 0.40 0.30 1.25 100

WEMI 1 0.23 33.75 59.79 2.78 0.71 0.81 2.15 100

WHPE 0 0.15 48.63 48.61 1.25 0.32 0.21 0.98 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 16 0.82 25.92 68.87 1.30 0.79 1.06 2.06 100

BAND 1 0.31 41.96 53.16 1.24 0.75 0.94 1.95 100

BLCA 2 0.35 31.77 66.43 0.47 0.29 0.29 0.75 100

CANY 28 1.10 43.62 52.48 0.91 0.55 1.03 1.41 100

CARE 12 0.76 26.38 71.01 0.64 0.38 0.58 1.01 100

GRCA 5 0.31 31.06 66.09 0.72 0.44 0.52 1.17 100

GRSA 0 0.18 87.77 6.73 1.38 0.83 1.12 2.17 100

LAGA 1 0.26 36.35 60.88 0.72 0.44 0.46 1.16 100

MABE 0 0.18 23.69 72.07 1.08 0.65 0.82 1.69 100

MEVE 55 1.51 47.09 35.97 3.88 2.35 4.67 6.04 100

PECO 2 0.29 24.39 68.71 1.72 1.04 1.48 2.67 100

PEFO 2 0.25 84.76 11.37 0.99 0.60 0.69 1.59 100

SAPE 10 0.61 26.56 68.07 1.32 0.80 1.20 2.05 100

WEEL 2 0.27 31.55 66.50 0.52 0.31 0.29 0.82 100

WEMI 3 0.37 22.71 69.34 1.89 1.14 1.99 2.93 100

WHPE 2 0.24 27.68 69.49 0.76 0.46 0.42 1.20 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.69 25.34 71.69 1.31 0.33 0.31 1.03 100

BAND 1 0.24 43.57 53.42 1.34 0.34 0.29 1.04 100

BLCA 2 0.29 23.45 74.26 0.99 0.25 0.26 0.78 100

CANY 22 1.00 38.19 59.52 1.01 0.26 0.23 0.80 100

CARE 11 0.57 26.93 71.52 0.67 0.17 0.17 0.53 100

GRCA 4 0.27 30.85 67.43 0.76 0.19 0.15 0.61 100

GRSA 0 0.14 21.45 76.75 0.80 0.20 0.17 0.63 100

LAGA 0 0.19 28.88 69.14 0.89 0.23 0.16 0.70 100

MABE 0 0.14 20.45 75.64 1.73 0.44 0.40 1.34 100

MEVE 38 1.35 35.69 59.62 2.00 0.51 0.63 1.55 100

PECO 1 0.23 25.62 70.23 1.82 0.47 0.44 1.41 100

PEFO 2 0.19 25.42 72.19 1.06 0.27 0.23 0.84 100

SAPE 7 0.44 27.36 69.47 1.39 0.36 0.35 1.08 100

WEEL 0 0.22 33.65 63.73 1.17 0.30 0.22 0.93 100

WEMI 2 0.31 30.63 61.38 3.48 0.89 0.91 2.70 100

WHPE 2 0.19 28.38 69.83 0.81 0.21 0.13 0.64 100

ROFA (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 13 0.60 29.10 67.48 1.50 0.38 0.35 1.18 100

BAND 1 0.22 30.05 66.22 1.70 0.44 0.27 1.32 100

BLCA 1 0.24 27.87 69.41 1.18 0.30 0.31 0.92 100

CANY 20 0.90 42.38 55.07 1.12 0.29 0.25 0.89 100

CARE 7 0.48 31.68 66.49 0.79 0.20 0.20 0.63 100

GRCA 2 0.23 35.91 62.09 0.88 0.23 0.18 0.72 100

GRSA 0 0.12 40.61 52.08 3.32 0.85 0.55 2.59 100

LAGA 0 0.17 82.11 13.26 2.04 0.52 0.46 1.60 100

MABE 0 0.12 24.34 71.01 2.06 0.53 0.48 1.59 100

MEVE 32 1.25 31.83 65.89 0.97 0.25 0.31 0.75 100

PECO 0 0.20 31.25 66.25 1.13 0.29 0.20 0.88 100

PEFO 1 0.18 31.50 66.42 0.90 0.23 0.25 0.71 100

SAPE 6 0.38 31.86 64.44 1.62 0.42 0.40 1.26 100

WEEL 0 0.19 39.09 57.87 1.36 0.35 0.26 1.08 100

WEMI 2 0.27 28.71 65.80 2.37 0.61 0.69 1.83 100

WHPE 1 0.17 42.34 55.25 1.09 0.28 0.18 0.85 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 11 0.68 24.06 72.39 0.91 0.55 0.63 1.46 100

BAND 7 0.49 50.26 40.84 2.33 1.41 1.50 3.66 100

BLCA 4 0.37 19.24 76.63 0.99 0.60 0.99 1.55 100

CANY 16 0.84 30.14 66.46 0.85 0.51 0.67 1.36 100

CARE 4 0.23 29.36 68.45 0.54 0.33 0.45 0.87 100

GRCA 1 0.21 42.87 54.86 0.58 0.35 0.37 0.97 100

GRSA 0 0.20 27.46 69.95 0.68 0.41 0.39 1.10 100

LAGA 0 0.28 23.68 72.69 0.93 0.56 0.66 1.48 100

MABE 0 0.16 27.20 65.28 2.09 1.27 0.76 3.40 100

MEVE 73 1.79 37.50 56.98 1.29 0.78 1.40 2.05 100

PECO 3 0.31 38.08 53.60 2.22 1.34 1.25 3.51 100

PEFO 2 0.16 28.11 69.15 0.71 0.43 0.44 1.17 100

SAPE 27 0.73 26.46 67.64 1.45 0.88 1.29 2.29 100

WEEL 1 0.28 23.98 70.42 1.36 0.82 1.31 2.11 100

WEMI 9 0.54 43.96 46.81 2.18 1.32 2.34 3.39 100

WHPE 0 0.25 30.07 67.71 0.57 0.35 0.39 0.92 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.54 23.97 72.89 1.37 0.35 0.35 1.07 100

BAND 4 0.40 31.04 66.80 0.95 0.24 0.22 0.75 100

BLCA 1 0.29 25.16 72.63 0.98 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

CANY 13 0.65 23.43 73.82 1.20 0.31 0.31 0.94 100

CARE 3 0.18 31.45 66.94 0.71 0.18 0.15 0.57 100

GRCA 1 0.16 43.73 54.87 0.62 0.16 0.11 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.14 27.52 70.87 0.72 0.19 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 0 0.21 25.77 71.45 1.20 0.31 0.33 0.94 100

MABE 0 0.12 26.89 71.16 0.87 0.22 0.16 0.69 100

MEVE 52 1.40 60.18 31.05 3.70 0.95 1.26 2.86 100

PECO 3 0.24 40.91 57.63 0.65 0.17 0.13 0.52 100

PEFO 0 0.13 28.41 69.90 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.62 100

SAPE 16 0.59 26.83 69.85 1.45 0.37 0.35 1.14 100

WEEL 0 0.20 24.64 72.13 1.40 0.36 0.38 1.09 100

WEMI 6 0.43 24.32 73.64 0.90 0.23 0.19 0.72 100

WHPE 0 0.17 31.55 67.09 0.60 0.15 0.12 0.49 100

Rotamix (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 5 0.43 30.43 65.58 1.74 0.45 0.44 1.36 100

BAND 4 0.32 38.79 58.51 1.18 0.30 0.28 0.93 100

BLCA 0 0.22 32.57 64.57 1.26 0.32 0.26 1.01 100

CANY 9 0.51 30.04 66.43 1.53 0.39 0.40 1.20 100

CARE 1 0.14 37.78 60.53 0.73 0.19 0.17 0.59 100

GRCA 0 0.14 52.70 45.61 0.74 0.19 0.14 0.62 100

GRSA 0 0.12 35.34 60.80 1.73 0.44 0.32 1.36 100

LAGA 0 0.17 32.85 63.61 1.54 0.39 0.42 1.19 100

MABE 0 0.10 35.80 58.15 2.79 0.72 0.29 2.26 100

MEVE 44 1.23 58.05 29.73 5.18 1.32 1.71 4.00 100

PECO 1 0.20 50.71 45.43 1.71 0.44 0.36 1.35 100

PEFO 0 0.11 35.18 62.04 1.24 0.32 0.20 1.02 100

SAPE 7 0.47 33.93 61.87 1.84 0.47 0.45 1.45 100

WEEL 0 0.16 31.41 64.48 1.79 0.46 0.48 1.38 100

WEMI 0 0.36 53.71 40.15 2.64 0.67 0.79 2.04 100

WHPE 0 0.14 61.79 33.59 2.11 0.54 0.28 1.68 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 11 0.68 24.06 72.39 0.91 0.55 0.63 1.46 100

BAND 7 0.49 50.26 40.84 2.33 1.41 1.50 3.66 100

BLCA 4 0.37 19.24 76.63 0.99 0.60 0.99 1.55 100

CANY 16 0.84 30.14 66.46 0.85 0.51 0.67 1.36 100

CARE 4 0.23 29.36 68.45 0.54 0.33 0.45 0.87 100

GRCA 1 0.21 42.87 54.86 0.58 0.35 0.37 0.97 100

GRSA 0 0.20 27.46 69.95 0.68 0.41 0.39 1.10 100

LAGA 0 0.28 23.68 72.69 0.93 0.56 0.66 1.48 100

MABE 0 0.16 27.20 65.28 2.09 1.27 0.76 3.40 100

MEVE 73 1.79 37.50 56.98 1.29 0.78 1.40 2.05 100

PECO 3 0.31 38.08 53.60 2.22 1.34 1.25 3.51 100

PEFO 2 0.16 28.11 69.15 0.71 0.43 0.44 1.17 100

SAPE 27 0.73 26.46 67.64 1.45 0.88 1.29 2.29 100

WEEL 1 0.28 23.98 70.42 1.36 0.82 1.31 2.11 100

WEMI 9 0.54 43.96 46.81 2.18 1.32 2.34 3.39 100

WHPE 0 0.25 30.07 67.71 0.57 0.35 0.39 0.92 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.54 23.97 72.89 1.37 0.35 0.35 1.07 100

BAND 4 0.40 31.04 66.80 0.95 0.24 0.22 0.75 100

BLCA 1 0.29 25.16 72.63 0.98 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

CANY 13 0.65 23.43 73.82 1.20 0.31 0.31 0.94 100

CARE 3 0.18 31.45 66.94 0.71 0.18 0.15 0.57 100

GRCA 1 0.16 43.73 54.87 0.62 0.16 0.11 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.14 27.52 70.87 0.72 0.19 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 0 0.21 25.77 71.45 1.20 0.31 0.33 0.94 100

MABE 0 0.12 26.89 71.16 0.87 0.22 0.16 0.69 100

MEVE 52 1.40 60.18 31.05 3.70 0.95 1.26 2.86 100

PECO 3 0.24 40.91 57.63 0.65 0.17 0.13 0.52 100

PEFO 0 0.13 28.41 69.90 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.62 100

SAPE 16 0.59 26.83 69.85 1.45 0.37 0.35 1.14 100

WEEL 0 0.20 24.64 72.13 1.40 0.36 0.38 1.09 100

WEMI 6 0.43 24.32 73.64 0.90 0.23 0.19 0.72 100

WHPE 0 0.17 31.55 67.09 0.60 0.15 0.12 0.49 100

ROFA/Rotamix (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 3 0.39 33.17 62.48 1.90 0.49 0.48 1.48 100

BAND 4 0.30 64.61 28.57 3.07 0.79 0.56 2.40 100

BLCA 0 0.20 35.69 61.18 1.39 0.35 0.29 1.11 100

CANY 7 0.47 32.86 63.28 1.68 0.43 0.43 1.32 100

CARE 1 0.13 42.78 55.04 0.96 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

GRCA 0 0.13 56.13 42.08 0.79 0.20 0.15 0.66 100

GRSA 0 0.12 90.48 5.94 1.62 0.41 0.26 1.29 100

LAGA 0 0.16 35.82 60.33 1.67 0.43 0.46 1.30 100

MABE 0 0.09 87.34 9.03 1.60 0.41 0.37 1.25 100

MEVE 40 1.17 43.27 46.96 4.19 1.07 1.26 3.24 100

PECO 0 0.19 53.93 41.97 1.82 0.47 0.38 1.44 100

PEFO 0 0.10 38.27 58.70 1.35 0.35 0.22 1.11 100

SAPE 7 0.44 60.54 34.61 2.15 0.55 0.49 1.66 100

WEEL 0 0.14 34.26 61.26 1.95 0.50 0.52 1.51 100

WEMI 0 0.34 56.56 36.98 2.78 0.71 0.83 2.15 100

WHPE 0 0.13 64.66 30.51 2.21 0.57 0.29 1.76 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 11 0.68 24.06 72.39 0.91 0.55 0.63 1.46 100

BAND 7 0.49 50.26 40.84 2.33 1.41 1.50 3.66 100

BLCA 4 0.37 19.24 76.63 0.99 0.60 0.99 1.55 100

CANY 16 0.84 30.14 66.46 0.85 0.51 0.67 1.36 100

CARE 4 0.23 29.36 68.45 0.54 0.33 0.45 0.87 100

GRCA 1 0.21 42.87 54.86 0.58 0.35 0.37 0.97 100

GRSA 0 0.20 27.46 69.95 0.68 0.41 0.39 1.10 100

LAGA 0 0.28 23.68 72.69 0.93 0.56 0.66 1.48 100

MABE 0 0.16 27.20 65.28 2.09 1.27 0.76 3.40 100

MEVE 73 1.79 37.50 56.98 1.29 0.78 1.40 2.05 100

PECO 3 0.31 38.08 53.60 2.22 1.34 1.25 3.51 100

PEFO 2 0.16 28.11 69.15 0.71 0.43 0.44 1.17 100

SAPE 27 0.73 26.46 67.64 1.45 0.88 1.29 2.29 100

WEEL 1 0.28 23.98 70.42 1.36 0.82 1.31 2.11 100

WEMI 9 0.54 43.96 46.81 2.18 1.32 2.34 3.39 100

WHPE 0 0.25 30.07 67.71 0.57 0.35 0.39 0.92 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.54 23.97 72.89 1.37 0.35 0.35 1.07 100

BAND 4 0.40 31.04 66.80 0.95 0.24 0.22 0.75 100

BLCA 1 0.29 25.16 72.63 0.98 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

CANY 13 0.65 23.43 73.82 1.20 0.31 0.31 0.94 100

CARE 3 0.18 31.45 66.94 0.71 0.18 0.15 0.57 100

GRCA 1 0.16 43.73 54.87 0.62 0.16 0.11 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.14 27.52 70.87 0.72 0.19 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 0 0.21 25.77 71.45 1.20 0.31 0.33 0.94 100

MABE 0 0.12 26.89 71.16 0.87 0.22 0.16 0.69 100

MEVE 52 1.40 60.18 31.05 3.70 0.95 1.26 2.86 100

PECO 3 0.24 40.91 57.63 0.65 0.17 0.13 0.52 100

PEFO 0 0.13 28.41 69.90 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.62 100

SAPE 16 0.59 26.83 69.85 1.45 0.37 0.35 1.14 100

WEEL 0 0.20 24.64 72.13 1.40 0.36 0.38 1.09 100

WEMI 6 0.43 24.32 73.64 0.90 0.23 0.19 0.72 100

WHPE 0 0.17 31.55 67.09 0.60 0.15 0.12 0.49 100

ROFA (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 6 0.46 28.51 69.02 1.09 0.28 0.22 0.87 100

BAND 4 0.34 36.08 61.42 1.10 0.28 0.26 0.87 100

BLCA 0 0.24 29.93 67.44 1.16 0.30 0.24 0.93 100

CANY 10 0.55 27.68 69.07 1.41 0.36 0.37 1.11 100

CARE 1 0.16 34.97 63.47 0.68 0.17 0.16 0.54 100

GRCA 0 0.15 49.65 48.76 0.70 0.18 0.13 0.58 100

GRSA 0 0.13 32.75 63.67 1.61 0.41 0.30 1.26 100

LAGA 0 0.18 29.04 68.34 1.16 0.30 0.24 0.92 100

MABE 0 0.10 33.27 61.10 2.60 0.66 0.27 2.10 100

MEVE 47 1.29 31.43 65.84 1.16 0.30 0.37 0.91 100

PECO 1 0.21 47.85 48.51 1.61 0.41 0.34 1.28 100

PEFO 0 0.11 93.50 1.70 2.12 0.54 0.44 1.69 100

SAPE 8 0.50 31.42 64.69 1.70 0.44 0.41 1.34 100

WEEL 0 0.17 29.01 67.20 1.65 0.42 0.44 1.28 100

WEMI 1 0.38 51.16 42.99 2.51 0.64 0.76 1.94 100

WHPE 0 0.14 36.85 61.56 0.71 0.18 0.14 0.57 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.60 28.75 65.62 1.35 0.81 1.33 2.14 100

BAND 8 0.54 22.07 72.47 1.34 0.81 1.23 2.09 100

BLCA 2 0.38 34.19 62.97 0.72 0.43 0.54 1.15 100

CANY 14 0.71 29.97 59.10 2.54 1.54 2.91 3.94 100

CARE 3 0.32 86.40 1.13 3.02 1.83 2.88 4.74 100

GRCA 0 0.16 51.56 42.85 1.42 0.86 1.00 2.30 100

GRSA 1 0.17 19.79 77.41 0.69 0.42 0.59 1.10 100

LAGA 2 0.29 36.29 60.25 0.89 0.54 0.59 1.44 100

MABE 0 0.16 31.87 65.36 0.70 0.42 0.53 1.12 100

MEVE 60 1.67 38.31 45.74 3.66 2.22 4.38 5.69 100

PECO 3 0.35 51.53 42.28 1.61 0.98 1.01 2.59 100

PEFO 0 0.14 31.20 64.81 1.05 0.64 0.58 1.73 100

SAPE 13 0.63 34.16 60.15 1.34 0.81 1.43 2.10 100

WEEL 0 0.25 23.83 70.37 1.42 0.86 1.27 2.25 100

WEMI 4 0.45 21.90 69.56 2.19 1.33 1.52 3.49 100

WHPE 1 0.26 22.07 72.11 1.47 0.89 1.11 2.34 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.52 29.53 67.07 1.47 0.38 0.40 1.16 100

BAND 3 0.37 23.82 72.96 1.41 0.36 0.36 1.10 100

BLCA 0 0.28 25.40 72.77 0.80 0.20 0.19 0.64 100

CANY 12 0.57 38.31 60.22 0.65 0.17 0.14 0.52 100

CARE 2 0.23 31.26 65.22 1.53 0.39 0.39 1.20 100

GRCA 0 0.12 52.37 44.18 1.52 0.39 0.31 1.22 100

GRSA 1 0.14 27.01 70.46 1.12 0.29 0.22 0.89 100

LAGA 0 0.21 20.74 75.52 1.71 0.44 0.17 1.41 100

MABE 0 0.11 33.14 63.55 1.53 0.39 0.19 1.20 100

MEVE 48 1.27 41.93 48.61 4.01 1.03 1.33 3.10 100

PECO 1 0.27 46.70 51.27 0.91 0.23 0.15 0.73 100

PEFO 0 0.11 31.59 65.92 1.12 0.29 0.18 0.91 100

SAPE 7 0.50 26.74 68.42 2.08 0.53 0.62 1.61 100

WEEL 0 0.20 20.88 76.49 1.15 0.30 0.29 0.90 100

WEMI 3 0.35 45.71 42.80 4.96 1.27 1.43 3.84 100

WHPE 0 0.20 22.74 73.74 1.56 0.40 0.34 1.23 100

Rotamix (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 5 0.44 59.02 38.91 0.91 0.23 0.20 0.73 100

BAND 1 0.29 30.40 65.49 1.80 0.46 0.45 1.40 100

BLCA 0 0.22 32.67 64.98 1.03 0.26 0.24 0.82 100

CANY 6 0.48 58.53 39.41 0.91 0.23 0.19 0.73 100

CARE 2 0.21 94.29 1.11 2.01 0.52 0.47 1.60 100

GRCA 0 0.12 94.09 0.96 2.19 0.56 0.45 1.75 100

GRSA 0 0.11 34.30 62.50 1.43 0.36 0.28 1.14 100

LAGA 0 0.17 43.30 53.72 1.31 0.33 0.31 1.02 100

MABE 0 0.09 41.33 54.55 1.91 0.49 0.23 1.50 100

MEVE 43 1.11 29.36 66.76 1.66 0.42 0.50 1.30 100

PECO 1 0.23 61.77 33.72 2.02 0.52 0.37 1.61 100

PEFO 0 0.10 90.79 5.30 1.75 0.45 0.32 1.40 100

SAPE 5 0.42 33.54 61.20 2.26 0.58 0.66 1.76 100

WEEL 0 0.16 44.53 53.47 0.88 0.22 0.20 0.70 100

WEMI 2 0.30 30.97 61.48 3.27 0.84 0.90 2.55 100

WHPE 0 0.17 43.59 54.56 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.66 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.60 28.75 65.62 1.35 0.81 1.33 2.14 100

BAND 8 0.54 22.07 72.47 1.34 0.81 1.23 2.09 100

BLCA 2 0.38 34.19 62.97 0.72 0.43 0.54 1.15 100

CANY 14 0.71 29.97 59.10 2.54 1.54 2.91 3.94 100

CARE 3 0.32 86.40 1.13 3.02 1.83 2.88 4.74 100

GRCA 0 0.16 51.56 42.85 1.42 0.86 1.00 2.30 100

GRSA 1 0.17 19.79 77.41 0.69 0.42 0.59 1.10 100

LAGA 2 0.29 36.29 60.25 0.89 0.54 0.59 1.44 100

MABE 0 0.16 31.87 65.36 0.70 0.42 0.53 1.12 100

MEVE 60 1.67 38.31 45.74 3.66 2.22 4.38 5.69 100

PECO 3 0.35 51.53 42.28 1.61 0.98 1.01 2.59 100

PEFO 0 0.14 31.20 64.81 1.05 0.64 0.58 1.73 100

SAPE 13 0.63 34.16 60.15 1.34 0.81 1.43 2.10 100

WEEL 0 0.25 23.83 70.37 1.42 0.86 1.27 2.25 100

WEMI 4 0.45 21.90 69.56 2.19 1.33 1.52 3.49 100

WHPE 1 0.26 22.07 72.11 1.47 0.89 1.11 2.34 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.52 29.53 67.07 1.47 0.38 0.40 1.16 100

BAND 3 0.37 23.82 72.96 1.41 0.36 0.36 1.10 100

BLCA 0 0.28 25.40 72.77 0.80 0.20 0.19 0.64 100

CANY 12 0.57 38.31 60.22 0.65 0.17 0.14 0.52 100

CARE 2 0.23 31.26 65.22 1.53 0.39 0.39 1.20 100

GRCA 0 0.12 52.37 44.18 1.52 0.39 0.31 1.22 100

GRSA 1 0.14 27.01 70.46 1.12 0.29 0.22 0.89 100

LAGA 0 0.21 20.74 75.52 1.71 0.44 0.17 1.41 100

MABE 0 0.11 33.14 63.55 1.53 0.39 0.19 1.20 100

MEVE 48 1.27 41.93 48.61 4.01 1.03 1.33 3.10 100

PECO 1 0.27 46.70 51.27 0.91 0.23 0.15 0.73 100

PEFO 0 0.11 31.59 65.92 1.12 0.29 0.18 0.91 100

SAPE 7 0.50 26.74 68.42 2.08 0.53 0.62 1.61 100

WEEL 0 0.20 20.88 76.49 1.15 0.30 0.29 0.90 100

WEMI 3 0.35 45.71 42.80 4.96 1.27 1.43 3.84 100

WHPE 0 0.20 22.74 73.74 1.56 0.40 0.34 1.23 100

ROFA/Rotamix (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 5 0.42 62.14 35.68 0.96 0.25 0.21 0.77 100

BAND 1 0.27 33.19 62.31 1.97 0.50 0.50 1.53 100

BLCA 0 0.21 53.30 41.86 2.10 0.54 0.57 1.64 100

CANY 6 0.45 61.63 36.20 0.95 0.24 0.20 0.77 100

CARE 2 0.21 94.43 0.96 2.02 0.52 0.47 1.60 100

GRCA 0 0.12 94.21 0.84 2.19 0.56 0.45 1.75 100

GRSA 0 0.10 37.34 59.17 1.55 0.40 0.31 1.24 100

LAGA 0 0.16 46.57 50.23 1.41 0.36 0.34 1.10 100

MABE 0 0.08 44.61 50.94 2.06 0.53 0.25 1.62 100

MEVE 42 1.03 71.30 11.15 7.49 1.92 2.36 5.78 100

PECO 1 0.22 58.29 39.17 1.14 0.29 0.19 0.91 100

PEFO 0 0.10 80.27 15.52 1.87 0.48 0.33 1.52 100

SAPE 5 0.39 35.87 58.50 2.42 0.62 0.71 1.88 100

WEEL 0 0.15 47.87 49.97 0.95 0.24 0.22 0.76 100

WEMI 1 0.27 29.70 65.44 2.09 0.53 0.62 1.62 100

WHPE 0 0.16 46.98 51.02 0.88 0.23 0.18 0.71 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.60 28.75 65.62 1.35 0.81 1.33 2.14 100

BAND 8 0.54 22.07 72.47 1.34 0.81 1.23 2.09 100

BLCA 2 0.38 34.19 62.97 0.72 0.43 0.54 1.15 100

CANY 14 0.71 29.97 59.10 2.54 1.54 2.91 3.94 100

CARE 3 0.32 86.40 1.13 3.02 1.83 2.88 4.74 100

GRCA 0 0.16 51.56 42.85 1.42 0.86 1.00 2.30 100

GRSA 1 0.17 19.79 77.41 0.69 0.42 0.59 1.10 100

LAGA 2 0.29 36.29 60.25 0.89 0.54 0.59 1.44 100

MABE 0 0.16 31.87 65.36 0.70 0.42 0.53 1.12 100

MEVE 60 1.67 38.31 45.74 3.66 2.22 4.38 5.69 100

PECO 3 0.35 51.53 42.28 1.61 0.98 1.01 2.59 100

PEFO 0 0.14 31.20 64.81 1.05 0.64 0.58 1.73 100

SAPE 13 0.63 34.16 60.15 1.34 0.81 1.43 2.10 100

WEEL 0 0.25 23.83 70.37 1.42 0.86 1.27 2.25 100

WEMI 4 0.45 21.90 69.56 2.19 1.33 1.52 3.49 100

WHPE 1 0.26 22.07 72.11 1.47 0.89 1.11 2.34 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.52 29.53 67.07 1.47 0.38 0.40 1.16 100

BAND 3 0.37 23.82 72.96 1.41 0.36 0.36 1.10 100

BLCA 0 0.28 25.40 72.77 0.80 0.20 0.19 0.64 100

CANY 12 0.57 38.31 60.22 0.65 0.17 0.14 0.52 100

CARE 2 0.23 31.26 65.22 1.53 0.39 0.39 1.20 100

GRCA 0 0.12 52.37 44.18 1.52 0.39 0.31 1.22 100

GRSA 1 0.14 27.01 70.46 1.12 0.29 0.22 0.89 100

LAGA 0 0.21 20.74 75.52 1.71 0.44 0.17 1.41 100

MABE 0 0.11 33.14 63.55 1.53 0.39 0.19 1.20 100

MEVE 48 1.27 41.93 48.61 4.01 1.03 1.33 3.10 100

PECO 1 0.27 46.70 51.27 0.91 0.23 0.15 0.73 100

PEFO 0 0.11 31.59 65.92 1.12 0.29 0.18 0.91 100

SAPE 7 0.50 26.74 68.42 2.08 0.53 0.62 1.61 100

WEEL 0 0.20 20.88 76.49 1.15 0.30 0.29 0.90 100

WEMI 3 0.35 45.71 42.80 4.96 1.27 1.43 3.84 100

WHPE 0 0.20 22.74 73.74 1.56 0.40 0.34 1.23 100

ROFA (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 7 0.46 56.21 41.82 0.87 0.22 0.19 0.70 100

BAND 1 0.32 28.05 68.15 1.66 0.43 0.42 1.29 100

BLCA 0 0.24 30.09 67.74 0.95 0.24 0.22 0.76 100

CANY 8 0.50 55.75 42.29 0.86 0.22 0.18 0.70 100

CARE 2 0.22 52.65 45.21 0.93 0.24 0.20 0.76 100

GRCA 0 0.12 93.96 1.09 2.18 0.56 0.45 1.75 100

GRSA 0 0.12 31.72 65.32 1.32 0.34 0.26 1.05 100

LAGA 0 0.18 40.47 56.75 1.22 0.31 0.29 0.95 100

MABE 0 0.09 38.48 57.67 1.78 0.45 0.22 1.39 100

MEVE 45 1.17 45.88 43.77 4.39 1.12 1.45 3.39 100

PECO 1 0.24 59.01 36.68 1.93 0.49 0.35 1.54 100

PEFO 0 0.10 90.14 5.97 1.74 0.44 0.32 1.39 100

SAPE 5 0.44 31.63 63.40 2.13 0.55 0.63 1.66 100

WEEL 0 0.18 41.61 56.51 0.82 0.21 0.19 0.66 100

WEMI 3 0.32 28.70 64.30 3.03 0.78 0.83 2.36 100

WHPE 0 0.18 92.03 4.39 1.62 0.42 0.27 1.27 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 16 0.83 25.00 69.90 1.28 0.78 1.04 2.02 100

BAND 1 0.32 25.12 71.09 1.01 0.61 0.61 1.57 100

BLCA 3 0.36 23.37 71.60 1.28 0.78 0.99 1.98 100

CANY 27 1.07 40.57 55.69 0.86 0.53 1.00 1.35 100

CARE 12 0.78 25.24 72.22 0.62 0.38 0.56 0.99 100

GRCA 5 0.31 29.84 67.36 0.71 0.43 0.51 1.15 100

GRSA 0 0.19 32.82 57.23 2.66 1.62 1.52 4.16 100

LAGA 0 0.26 34.98 62.29 0.71 0.43 0.46 1.14 100

MABE 0 0.18 19.11 76.53 1.10 0.67 0.86 1.73 100

MEVE 56 1.49 45.92 37.44 3.81 2.32 4.60 5.92 100

PECO 2 0.29 84.16 9.33 1.63 0.99 1.33 2.56 100

PEFO 2 0.25 23.63 72.55 0.97 0.59 0.72 1.54 100

SAPE 11 0.63 25.41 69.31 1.29 0.79 1.19 2.01 100

WEEL 1 0.27 30.10 67.99 0.51 0.31 0.29 0.80 100

WEMI 3 0.38 31.78 59.74 2.05 1.25 1.98 3.19 100

WHPE 2 0.24 26.23 70.99 0.74 0.45 0.42 1.17 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.69 25.31 71.71 1.31 0.34 0.31 1.02 100

BAND 1 0.23 43.57 53.42 1.34 0.34 0.29 1.03 100

BLCA 2 0.28 23.45 74.26 1.00 0.26 0.26 0.77 100

CANY 22 0.99 38.13 59.58 1.01 0.26 0.23 0.80 100

CARE 10 0.57 26.92 71.52 0.68 0.17 0.17 0.53 100

GRCA 4 0.27 30.84 67.43 0.76 0.20 0.15 0.61 100

GRSA 0 0.14 21.45 76.75 0.80 0.21 0.17 0.62 100

LAGA 0 0.19 28.87 69.14 0.89 0.23 0.16 0.70 100

MABE 0 0.14 20.45 75.64 1.74 0.44 0.40 1.33 100

MEVE 38 1.35 35.54 59.78 2.00 0.51 0.63 1.53 100

PECO 1 0.23 25.62 70.23 1.83 0.47 0.44 1.40 100

PEFO 2 0.19 25.42 72.18 1.07 0.27 0.23 0.83 100

SAPE 7 0.44 27.35 69.47 1.40 0.36 0.35 1.07 100

WEEL 0 0.22 33.65 63.72 1.18 0.30 0.22 0.92 100

WEMI 2 0.31 30.63 61.38 3.50 0.90 0.91 2.69 100

WHPE 2 0.18 28.38 69.83 0.82 0.21 0.13 0.64 100

Rotamix (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 12 0.56 31.23 65.10 1.62 0.41 0.38 1.26 100

BAND 1 0.20 32.57 63.38 1.86 0.48 0.29 1.43 100

BLCA 1 0.22 30.31 66.73 1.29 0.33 0.34 1.00 100

CANY 18 0.85 43.19 54.66 0.95 0.24 0.20 0.75 100

CARE 6 0.45 34.30 63.72 0.86 0.22 0.22 0.68 100

GRCA 2 0.21 38.64 59.21 0.95 0.24 0.19 0.77 100

GRSA 0 0.12 80.85 12.97 2.85 0.73 0.39 2.21 100

LAGA 0 0.16 32.90 62.21 2.17 0.56 0.48 1.68 100

MABE 0 0.11 26.50 68.42 2.25 0.58 0.52 1.73 100

MEVE 31 1.16 54.29 35.03 4.53 1.16 1.51 3.47 100

PECO 0 0.18 33.95 63.34 1.23 0.31 0.22 0.95 100

PEFO 1 0.16 34.18 63.56 0.98 0.25 0.27 0.76 100

SAPE 5 0.35 34.32 61.69 1.76 0.45 0.44 1.35 100

WEEL 0 0.18 41.98 54.75 1.47 0.38 0.27 1.15 100

WEMI 2 0.24 31.02 63.04 2.57 0.66 0.74 1.97 100

WHPE 0 0.16 45.27 52.16 1.17 0.30 0.20 0.91 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 16 0.83 25.00 69.90 1.28 0.78 1.04 2.02 100

BAND 1 0.32 25.12 71.09 1.01 0.61 0.61 1.57 100

BLCA 3 0.36 23.37 71.60 1.28 0.78 0.99 1.98 100

CANY 27 1.07 40.57 55.69 0.86 0.53 1.00 1.35 100

CARE 12 0.78 25.24 72.22 0.62 0.38 0.56 0.99 100

GRCA 5 0.31 29.84 67.36 0.71 0.43 0.51 1.15 100

GRSA 0 0.19 32.82 57.23 2.66 1.62 1.52 4.16 100

LAGA 0 0.26 34.98 62.29 0.71 0.43 0.46 1.14 100

MABE 0 0.18 19.11 76.53 1.10 0.67 0.86 1.73 100

MEVE 56 1.49 45.92 37.44 3.81 2.32 4.60 5.92 100

PECO 2 0.29 84.16 9.33 1.63 0.99 1.33 2.56 100

PEFO 2 0.25 23.63 72.55 0.97 0.59 0.72 1.54 100

SAPE 11 0.63 25.41 69.31 1.29 0.79 1.19 2.01 100

WEEL 1 0.27 30.10 67.99 0.51 0.31 0.29 0.80 100

WEMI 3 0.38 31.78 59.74 2.05 1.25 1.98 3.19 100

WHPE 2 0.24 26.23 70.99 0.74 0.45 0.42 1.17 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.69 25.31 71.71 1.31 0.34 0.31 1.02 100

BAND 1 0.23 43.57 53.42 1.34 0.34 0.29 1.03 100

BLCA 2 0.28 23.45 74.26 1.00 0.26 0.26 0.77 100

CANY 22 0.99 38.13 59.58 1.01 0.26 0.23 0.80 100

CARE 10 0.57 26.92 71.52 0.68 0.17 0.17 0.53 100

GRCA 4 0.27 30.84 67.43 0.76 0.20 0.15 0.61 100

GRSA 0 0.14 21.45 76.75 0.80 0.21 0.17 0.62 100

LAGA 0 0.19 28.87 69.14 0.89 0.23 0.16 0.70 100

MABE 0 0.14 20.45 75.64 1.74 0.44 0.40 1.33 100

MEVE 38 1.35 35.54 59.78 2.00 0.51 0.63 1.53 100

PECO 1 0.23 25.62 70.23 1.83 0.47 0.44 1.40 100

PEFO 2 0.19 25.42 72.18 1.07 0.27 0.23 0.83 100

SAPE 7 0.44 27.35 69.47 1.40 0.36 0.35 1.07 100

WEEL 0 0.22 33.65 63.72 1.18 0.30 0.22 0.92 100

WEMI 2 0.31 30.63 61.38 3.50 0.90 0.91 2.69 100

WHPE 2 0.18 28.38 69.83 0.82 0.21 0.13 0.64 100

ROFA/Rotamix (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.52 33.83 62.19 1.76 0.45 0.41 1.37 100

BAND 1 0.18 34.57 62.38 1.36 0.35 0.29 1.05 100

BLCA 1 0.20 33.22 63.53 1.42 0.36 0.37 1.10 100

CANY 17 0.79 46.43 51.26 1.03 0.26 0.22 0.81 100

CARE 5 0.41 37.41 60.43 0.94 0.24 0.24 0.74 100

GRCA 2 0.20 41.85 55.82 1.03 0.26 0.21 0.83 100

GRSA 0 0.11 82.32 11.39 2.90 0.74 0.40 2.25 100

LAGA 0 0.15 35.88 58.78 2.37 0.61 0.53 1.83 100

MABE 0 0.10 29.09 65.33 2.47 0.63 0.57 1.90 100

MEVE 29 1.13 56.15 32.81 4.69 1.20 1.56 3.59 100

PECO 0 0.17 51.47 45.22 1.49 0.38 0.29 1.16 100

PEFO 1 0.15 89.30 7.04 1.60 0.41 0.39 1.26 100

SAPE 4 0.32 37.24 58.43 1.91 0.49 0.47 1.46 100

WEEL 0 0.16 45.31 51.16 1.59 0.41 0.30 1.24 100

WEMI 1 0.22 33.75 59.79 2.79 0.72 0.81 2.14 100

WHPE 0 0.14 48.63 48.61 1.26 0.32 0.21 0.97 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 16 0.83 25.00 69.90 1.28 0.78 1.04 2.02 100

BAND 1 0.32 25.12 71.09 1.01 0.61 0.61 1.57 100

BLCA 3 0.36 23.37 71.60 1.28 0.78 0.99 1.98 100

CANY 27 1.07 40.57 55.69 0.86 0.53 1.00 1.35 100

CARE 12 0.78 25.24 72.22 0.62 0.38 0.56 0.99 100

GRCA 5 0.31 29.84 67.36 0.71 0.43 0.51 1.15 100

GRSA 0 0.19 32.82 57.23 2.66 1.62 1.52 4.16 100

LAGA 0 0.26 34.98 62.29 0.71 0.43 0.46 1.14 100

MABE 0 0.18 19.11 76.53 1.10 0.67 0.86 1.73 100

MEVE 56 1.49 45.92 37.44 3.81 2.32 4.60 5.92 100

PECO 2 0.29 84.16 9.33 1.63 0.99 1.33 2.56 100

PEFO 2 0.25 23.63 72.55 0.97 0.59 0.72 1.54 100

SAPE 11 0.63 25.41 69.31 1.29 0.79 1.19 2.01 100

WEEL 1 0.27 30.10 67.99 0.51 0.31 0.29 0.80 100

WEMI 3 0.38 31.78 59.74 2.05 1.25 1.98 3.19 100

WHPE 2 0.24 26.23 70.99 0.74 0.45 0.42 1.17 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.69 25.31 71.71 1.31 0.34 0.31 1.02 100

BAND 1 0.23 43.57 53.42 1.34 0.34 0.29 1.03 100

BLCA 2 0.28 23.45 74.26 1.00 0.26 0.26 0.77 100

CANY 22 0.99 38.13 59.58 1.01 0.26 0.23 0.80 100

CARE 10 0.57 26.92 71.52 0.68 0.17 0.17 0.53 100

GRCA 4 0.27 30.84 67.43 0.76 0.20 0.15 0.61 100

GRSA 0 0.14 21.45 76.75 0.80 0.21 0.17 0.62 100

LAGA 0 0.19 28.87 69.14 0.89 0.23 0.16 0.70 100

MABE 0 0.14 20.45 75.64 1.74 0.44 0.40 1.33 100

MEVE 38 1.35 35.54 59.78 2.00 0.51 0.63 1.53 100

PECO 1 0.23 25.62 70.23 1.83 0.47 0.44 1.40 100

PEFO 2 0.19 25.42 72.18 1.07 0.27 0.23 0.83 100

SAPE 7 0.44 27.35 69.47 1.40 0.36 0.35 1.07 100

WEEL 0 0.22 33.65 63.72 1.18 0.30 0.22 0.92 100

WEMI 2 0.31 30.63 61.38 3.50 0.90 0.91 2.69 100

WHPE 2 0.18 28.38 69.83 0.82 0.21 0.13 0.64 100

ROFA (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 13 0.60 29.08 67.50 1.51 0.39 0.35 1.17 100

BAND 1 0.21 30.05 66.21 1.71 0.44 0.27 1.32 100

BLCA 1 0.24 27.87 69.41 1.19 0.30 0.31 0.92 100

CANY 20 0.90 42.34 55.12 1.12 0.29 0.25 0.88 100

CARE 7 0.48 31.68 66.50 0.80 0.20 0.20 0.62 100

GRCA 2 0.23 35.90 62.10 0.89 0.23 0.18 0.71 100

GRSA 0 0.12 40.61 52.08 3.34 0.85 0.55 2.57 100

LAGA 0 0.17 82.11 13.26 2.05 0.53 0.46 1.59 100

MABE 0 0.12 24.34 71.00 2.07 0.53 0.48 1.59 100

MEVE 32 1.24 31.82 65.90 0.98 0.25 0.31 0.75 100

PECO 0 0.20 31.25 66.25 1.13 0.29 0.20 0.88 100

PEFO 1 0.17 31.50 66.41 0.90 0.23 0.25 0.70 100

SAPE 6 0.38 31.85 64.45 1.63 0.42 0.40 1.25 100

WEEL 0 0.19 39.09 57.87 1.37 0.35 0.26 1.07 100

WEMI 2 0.26 28.70 65.80 2.38 0.61 0.69 1.82 100

WHPE 1 0.17 42.34 55.26 1.09 0.28 0.18 0.85 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 11 0.64 26.15 67.85 1.45 0.89 1.39 2.27 100

BAND 7 0.50 48.55 42.63 2.30 1.40 1.49 3.62 100

BLCA 4 0.37 18.38 77.59 0.97 0.59 0.97 1.51 100

CANY 15 0.83 28.77 67.90 0.83 0.51 0.66 1.33 100

CARE 4 0.23 27.98 69.89 0.53 0.32 0.44 0.85 100

GRCA 1 0.20 40.86 56.90 0.57 0.35 0.37 0.95 100

GRSA 0 0.21 26.11 71.35 0.67 0.41 0.39 1.08 100

LAGA 0 0.29 22.65 73.82 0.90 0.55 0.64 1.44 100

MABE 0 0.16 26.26 66.39 2.05 1.25 0.74 3.32 100

MEVE 72 1.82 36.41 58.08 1.29 0.79 1.39 2.04 100

PECO 3 0.31 36.65 55.19 2.17 1.32 1.23 3.43 100

PEFO 2 0.16 26.72 70.61 0.69 0.42 0.43 1.13 100

SAPE 28 0.73 25.48 68.66 1.43 0.87 1.28 2.26 100

WEEL 1 0.29 22.95 71.57 1.32 0.81 1.29 2.06 100

WEMI 9 0.56 18.60 76.08 1.26 0.77 1.32 1.97 100

WHPE 0 0.26 28.49 69.36 0.55 0.33 0.38 0.89 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.54 23.96 72.89 1.38 0.35 0.35 1.07 100

BAND 4 0.40 31.03 66.81 0.95 0.24 0.22 0.74 100

BLCA 1 0.29 25.16 72.63 0.98 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

CANY 13 0.65 23.42 73.82 1.20 0.31 0.31 0.93 100

CARE 3 0.18 31.45 66.94 0.71 0.18 0.15 0.57 100

GRCA 1 0.16 43.73 54.87 0.62 0.16 0.11 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.14 27.52 70.87 0.73 0.19 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 0 0.21 25.77 71.45 1.21 0.31 0.33 0.93 100

MABE 0 0.11 26.89 71.16 0.88 0.22 0.16 0.69 100

MEVE 52 1.40 60.02 31.23 3.71 0.95 1.25 2.84 100

PECO 3 0.24 40.91 57.63 0.65 0.17 0.13 0.52 100

PEFO 0 0.13 28.41 69.90 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.61 100

SAPE 16 0.58 26.82 69.85 1.46 0.37 0.35 1.14 100

WEEL 0 0.20 24.64 72.13 1.41 0.36 0.38 1.08 100

WEMI 6 0.42 24.31 73.65 0.91 0.23 0.19 0.72 100

WHPE 0 0.17 31.55 67.09 0.61 0.16 0.12 0.48 100

Rotamix (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 5 0.43 30.42 65.59 1.75 0.45 0.44 1.35 100

BAND 4 0.32 38.79 58.51 1.19 0.30 0.28 0.93 100

BLCA 0 0.22 32.57 64.57 1.27 0.33 0.26 1.01 100

CANY 9 0.51 30.04 66.43 1.54 0.39 0.40 1.20 100

CARE 1 0.14 37.78 60.53 0.74 0.19 0.17 0.58 100

GRCA 0 0.14 52.70 45.61 0.75 0.19 0.14 0.61 100

GRSA 0 0.12 35.34 60.79 1.74 0.45 0.32 1.36 100

LAGA 0 0.17 32.85 63.60 1.54 0.40 0.42 1.19 100

MABE 0 0.10 35.80 58.14 2.81 0.72 0.29 2.25 100

MEVE 44 1.22 58.02 29.75 5.20 1.33 1.72 3.98 100

PECO 0 0.20 50.70 45.43 1.72 0.44 0.36 1.35 100

PEFO 0 0.11 35.18 62.04 1.25 0.32 0.20 1.02 100

SAPE 7 0.46 33.93 61.87 1.85 0.47 0.45 1.44 100

WEEL 0 0.16 31.41 64.48 1.80 0.46 0.48 1.38 100

WEMI 0 0.36 53.70 40.15 2.65 0.68 0.79 2.03 100

WHPE 0 0.13 61.79 33.59 2.13 0.54 0.28 1.67 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 11 0.64 26.15 67.85 1.45 0.89 1.39 2.27 100

BAND 7 0.50 48.55 42.63 2.30 1.40 1.49 3.62 100

BLCA 4 0.37 18.38 77.59 0.97 0.59 0.97 1.51 100

CANY 15 0.83 28.77 67.90 0.83 0.51 0.66 1.33 100

CARE 4 0.23 27.98 69.89 0.53 0.32 0.44 0.85 100

GRCA 1 0.20 40.86 56.90 0.57 0.35 0.37 0.95 100

GRSA 0 0.21 26.11 71.35 0.67 0.41 0.39 1.08 100

LAGA 0 0.29 22.65 73.82 0.90 0.55 0.64 1.44 100

MABE 0 0.16 26.26 66.39 2.05 1.25 0.74 3.32 100

MEVE 72 1.82 36.41 58.08 1.29 0.79 1.39 2.04 100

PECO 3 0.31 36.65 55.19 2.17 1.32 1.23 3.43 100

PEFO 2 0.16 26.72 70.61 0.69 0.42 0.43 1.13 100

SAPE 28 0.73 25.48 68.66 1.43 0.87 1.28 2.26 100

WEEL 1 0.29 22.95 71.57 1.32 0.81 1.29 2.06 100

WEMI 9 0.56 18.60 76.08 1.26 0.77 1.32 1.97 100

WHPE 0 0.26 28.49 69.36 0.55 0.33 0.38 0.89 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.54 23.96 72.89 1.38 0.35 0.35 1.07 100

BAND 4 0.40 31.03 66.81 0.95 0.24 0.22 0.74 100

BLCA 1 0.29 25.16 72.63 0.98 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

CANY 13 0.65 23.42 73.82 1.20 0.31 0.31 0.93 100

CARE 3 0.18 31.45 66.94 0.71 0.18 0.15 0.57 100

GRCA 1 0.16 43.73 54.87 0.62 0.16 0.11 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.14 27.52 70.87 0.73 0.19 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 0 0.21 25.77 71.45 1.21 0.31 0.33 0.93 100

MABE 0 0.11 26.89 71.16 0.88 0.22 0.16 0.69 100

MEVE 52 1.40 60.02 31.23 3.71 0.95 1.25 2.84 100

PECO 3 0.24 40.91 57.63 0.65 0.17 0.13 0.52 100

PEFO 0 0.13 28.41 69.90 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.61 100

SAPE 16 0.58 26.82 69.85 1.46 0.37 0.35 1.14 100

WEEL 0 0.20 24.64 72.13 1.41 0.36 0.38 1.08 100

WEMI 6 0.42 24.31 73.65 0.91 0.23 0.19 0.72 100

WHPE 0 0.17 31.55 67.09 0.61 0.16 0.12 0.48 100

ROFA/Rotamix (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 3 0.39 33.17 62.48 1.91 0.49 0.48 1.47 100

BAND 4 0.29 48.71 49.07 0.97 0.25 0.23 0.76 100

BLCA 0 0.20 35.69 61.17 1.39 0.36 0.29 1.10 100

CANY 7 0.47 32.86 63.28 1.69 0.43 0.43 1.31 100

CARE 1 0.13 42.78 55.04 0.96 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

GRCA 0 0.13 56.13 42.07 0.80 0.20 0.15 0.65 100

GRSA 0 0.12 90.47 5.94 1.63 0.42 0.26 1.28 100

LAGA 0 0.15 35.81 60.32 1.68 0.43 0.46 1.29 100

MABE 0 0.09 87.34 9.03 1.61 0.41 0.37 1.25 100

MEVE 40 1.17 43.21 47.02 4.21 1.08 1.26 3.22 100

PECO 0 0.19 53.92 41.97 1.83 0.47 0.38 1.43 100

PEFO 0 0.10 38.27 58.70 1.36 0.35 0.22 1.11 100

SAPE 7 0.44 60.49 34.67 2.15 0.55 0.49 1.65 100

WEEL 0 0.14 34.25 61.26 1.96 0.50 0.52 1.50 100

WEMI 0 0.34 56.54 36.98 2.79 0.71 0.84 2.14 100

WHPE 0 0.13 64.65 30.51 2.22 0.57 0.29 1.75 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 11 0.64 26.15 67.85 1.45 0.89 1.39 2.27 100

BAND 7 0.50 48.55 42.63 2.30 1.40 1.49 3.62 100

BLCA 4 0.37 18.38 77.59 0.97 0.59 0.97 1.51 100

CANY 15 0.83 28.77 67.90 0.83 0.51 0.66 1.33 100

CARE 4 0.23 27.98 69.89 0.53 0.32 0.44 0.85 100

GRCA 1 0.20 40.86 56.90 0.57 0.35 0.37 0.95 100

GRSA 0 0.21 26.11 71.35 0.67 0.41 0.39 1.08 100

LAGA 0 0.29 22.65 73.82 0.90 0.55 0.64 1.44 100

MABE 0 0.16 26.26 66.39 2.05 1.25 0.74 3.32 100

MEVE 72 1.82 36.41 58.08 1.29 0.79 1.39 2.04 100

PECO 3 0.31 36.65 55.19 2.17 1.32 1.23 3.43 100

PEFO 2 0.16 26.72 70.61 0.69 0.42 0.43 1.13 100

SAPE 28 0.73 25.48 68.66 1.43 0.87 1.28 2.26 100

WEEL 1 0.29 22.95 71.57 1.32 0.81 1.29 2.06 100

WEMI 9 0.56 18.60 76.08 1.26 0.77 1.32 1.97 100

WHPE 0 0.26 28.49 69.36 0.55 0.33 0.38 0.89 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.54 23.96 72.89 1.38 0.35 0.35 1.07 100

BAND 4 0.40 31.03 66.81 0.95 0.24 0.22 0.74 100

BLCA 1 0.29 25.16 72.63 0.98 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

CANY 13 0.65 23.42 73.82 1.20 0.31 0.31 0.93 100

CARE 3 0.18 31.45 66.94 0.71 0.18 0.15 0.57 100

GRCA 1 0.16 43.73 54.87 0.62 0.16 0.11 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.14 27.52 70.87 0.73 0.19 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 0 0.21 25.77 71.45 1.21 0.31 0.33 0.93 100

MABE 0 0.11 26.89 71.16 0.88 0.22 0.16 0.69 100

MEVE 52 1.40 60.02 31.23 3.71 0.95 1.25 2.84 100

PECO 3 0.24 40.91 57.63 0.65 0.17 0.13 0.52 100

PEFO 0 0.13 28.41 69.90 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.61 100

SAPE 16 0.58 26.82 69.85 1.46 0.37 0.35 1.14 100

WEEL 0 0.20 24.64 72.13 1.41 0.36 0.38 1.08 100

WEMI 6 0.42 24.31 73.65 0.91 0.23 0.19 0.72 100

WHPE 0 0.17 31.55 67.09 0.61 0.16 0.12 0.48 100

ROFA (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 6 0.46 28.50 69.03 1.10 0.28 0.22 0.87 100

BAND 4 0.34 36.07 61.42 1.11 0.28 0.26 0.86 100

BLCA 0 0.24 29.94 67.43 1.17 0.30 0.24 0.92 100

CANY 10 0.55 27.67 69.07 1.42 0.36 0.37 1.10 100

CARE 1 0.15 34.97 63.47 0.68 0.17 0.16 0.54 100

GRCA 0 0.14 49.65 48.76 0.70 0.18 0.13 0.58 100

GRSA 0 0.13 32.75 63.67 1.61 0.41 0.30 1.26 100

LAGA 0 0.18 30.35 66.38 1.43 0.36 0.39 1.10 100

MABE 0 0.10 33.27 61.10 2.61 0.67 0.27 2.09 100

MEVE 47 1.28 31.40 65.86 1.17 0.30 0.37 0.90 100

PECO 1 0.21 47.84 48.51 1.62 0.41 0.34 1.27 100

PEFO 0 0.11 93.49 1.70 2.14 0.55 0.44 1.68 100

SAPE 7 0.50 31.42 64.69 1.71 0.44 0.42 1.33 100

WEEL 0 0.17 29.01 67.20 1.66 0.42 0.44 1.27 100

WEMI 1 0.37 51.15 42.99 2.52 0.65 0.76 1.93 100

WHPE 0 0.14 36.85 61.56 0.71 0.18 0.14 0.56 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.58 26.09 65.91 1.91 1.16 1.95 2.97 100

BAND 8 0.54 21.18 73.48 1.31 0.80 1.19 2.04 100

BLCA 3 0.39 31.74 65.45 0.70 0.43 0.55 1.12 100

CANY 13 0.72 29.11 60.16 2.49 1.52 2.85 3.87 100

CARE 3 0.31 86.04 1.21 3.09 1.88 2.94 4.84 100

GRCA 0 0.16 49.96 44.45 1.42 0.86 1.00 2.29 100

GRSA 1 0.17 25.45 72.07 0.69 0.42 0.28 1.09 100

LAGA 1 0.29 19.38 74.87 1.61 0.98 0.49 2.66 100

MABE 0 0.16 31.67 65.36 0.73 0.45 0.63 1.16 100

MEVE 60 1.66 38.26 45.78 3.66 2.23 4.39 5.68 100

PECO 3 0.36 20.30 74.98 1.21 0.74 0.82 1.96 100

PEFO 0 0.14 69.40 24.51 1.58 0.96 0.97 2.58 100

SAPE 13 0.64 24.73 67.13 1.92 1.17 2.07 2.99 100

WEEL 0 0.26 22.86 71.46 1.39 0.85 1.25 2.20 100

WEMI 4 0.44 37.67 57.85 1.06 0.65 1.12 1.65 100

WHPE 1 0.26 32.19 65.39 0.61 0.37 0.45 0.98 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.52 29.52 67.08 1.47 0.38 0.40 1.15 100

BAND 3 0.37 23.81 72.96 1.42 0.36 0.36 1.09 100

BLCA 0 0.28 25.40 72.77 0.80 0.21 0.19 0.64 100

CANY 12 0.57 38.31 60.22 0.65 0.17 0.14 0.52 100

CARE 2 0.23 31.25 65.23 1.54 0.39 0.39 1.20 100

GRCA 0 0.12 52.36 44.18 1.53 0.39 0.31 1.22 100

GRSA 1 0.14 27.01 70.46 1.13 0.29 0.22 0.89 100

LAGA 0 0.21 20.74 75.52 1.72 0.44 0.17 1.40 100

MABE 0 0.11 33.14 63.55 1.54 0.39 0.19 1.19 100

MEVE 48 1.26 41.89 48.65 4.03 1.03 1.33 3.08 100

PECO 1 0.27 46.68 51.28 0.92 0.24 0.15 0.73 100

PEFO 0 0.11 72.61 23.59 1.70 0.44 0.30 1.37 100

SAPE 7 0.50 26.73 68.43 2.09 0.53 0.62 1.60 100

WEEL 0 0.20 20.87 76.49 1.16 0.30 0.29 0.89 100

WEMI 3 0.35 45.70 42.79 4.98 1.28 1.43 3.82 100

WHPE 0 0.20 22.74 73.73 1.56 0.40 0.34 1.22 100

Rotamix (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 5 0.44 59.01 38.92 0.92 0.23 0.20 0.73 100

BAND 1 0.29 30.39 65.49 1.81 0.46 0.45 1.39 100

BLCA 0 0.22 32.67 64.98 1.03 0.26 0.24 0.82 100

CANY 6 0.48 58.52 39.42 0.91 0.23 0.19 0.73 100

CARE 2 0.21 94.29 1.11 2.02 0.52 0.47 1.59 100

GRCA 0 0.12 94.08 0.96 2.20 0.56 0.45 1.74 100

GRSA 0 0.11 34.29 62.50 1.43 0.37 0.28 1.13 100

LAGA 0 0.17 43.30 53.72 1.31 0.34 0.31 1.02 100

MABE 0 0.09 41.33 54.54 1.92 0.49 0.23 1.49 100

MEVE 43 1.10 29.35 66.76 1.67 0.43 0.50 1.29 100

PECO 1 0.23 61.77 33.72 2.03 0.52 0.37 1.60 100

PEFO 0 0.10 90.78 5.29 1.76 0.45 0.32 1.40 100

SAPE 5 0.42 33.50 61.24 2.27 0.58 0.66 1.74 100

WEEL 0 0.16 44.52 53.47 0.88 0.23 0.20 0.70 100

WEMI 2 0.29 30.97 61.47 3.29 0.84 0.90 2.54 100

WHPE 0 0.17 43.59 54.56 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.65 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.58 26.09 65.91 1.91 1.16 1.95 2.97 100

BAND 8 0.54 21.18 73.48 1.31 0.80 1.19 2.04 100

BLCA 3 0.39 31.74 65.45 0.70 0.43 0.55 1.12 100

CANY 13 0.72 29.11 60.16 2.49 1.52 2.85 3.87 100

CARE 3 0.31 86.04 1.21 3.09 1.88 2.94 4.84 100

GRCA 0 0.16 49.96 44.45 1.42 0.86 1.00 2.29 100

GRSA 1 0.17 25.45 72.07 0.69 0.42 0.28 1.09 100

LAGA 1 0.29 19.38 74.87 1.61 0.98 0.49 2.66 100

MABE 0 0.16 31.67 65.36 0.73 0.45 0.63 1.16 100

MEVE 60 1.66 38.26 45.78 3.66 2.23 4.39 5.68 100

PECO 3 0.36 20.30 74.98 1.21 0.74 0.82 1.96 100

PEFO 0 0.14 69.40 24.51 1.58 0.96 0.97 2.58 100

SAPE 13 0.64 24.73 67.13 1.92 1.17 2.07 2.99 100

WEEL 0 0.26 22.86 71.46 1.39 0.85 1.25 2.20 100

WEMI 4 0.44 37.67 57.85 1.06 0.65 1.12 1.65 100

WHPE 1 0.26 32.19 65.39 0.61 0.37 0.45 0.98 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.52 29.52 67.08 1.47 0.38 0.40 1.15 100

BAND 3 0.37 23.81 72.96 1.42 0.36 0.36 1.09 100

BLCA 0 0.28 25.40 72.77 0.80 0.21 0.19 0.64 100

CANY 12 0.57 38.31 60.22 0.65 0.17 0.14 0.52 100

CARE 2 0.23 31.25 65.23 1.54 0.39 0.39 1.20 100

GRCA 0 0.12 52.36 44.18 1.53 0.39 0.31 1.22 100

GRSA 1 0.14 27.01 70.46 1.13 0.29 0.22 0.89 100

LAGA 0 0.21 20.74 75.52 1.72 0.44 0.17 1.40 100

MABE 0 0.11 33.14 63.55 1.54 0.39 0.19 1.19 100

MEVE 48 1.26 41.89 48.65 4.03 1.03 1.33 3.08 100

PECO 1 0.27 46.68 51.28 0.92 0.24 0.15 0.73 100

PEFO 0 0.11 72.61 23.59 1.70 0.44 0.30 1.37 100

SAPE 7 0.50 26.73 68.43 2.09 0.53 0.62 1.60 100

WEEL 0 0.20 20.87 76.49 1.16 0.30 0.29 0.89 100

WEMI 3 0.35 45.70 42.79 4.98 1.28 1.43 3.82 100

WHPE 0 0.20 22.74 73.73 1.56 0.40 0.34 1.22 100

ROFA/Rotamix (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 5 0.41 62.13 35.69 0.96 0.25 0.21 0.77 100

BAND 1 0.27 33.19 62.31 1.98 0.51 0.50 1.52 100

BLCA 0 0.21 53.27 41.89 2.11 0.54 0.57 1.63 100

CANY 6 0.45 61.62 36.21 0.96 0.25 0.20 0.77 100

CARE 2 0.21 94.43 0.96 2.03 0.52 0.47 1.59 100

GRCA 0 0.12 94.20 0.84 2.20 0.56 0.45 1.74 100

GRSA 0 0.10 37.34 59.17 1.56 0.40 0.31 1.23 100

LAGA 0 0.16 46.57 50.23 1.41 0.36 0.34 1.09 100

MABE 0 0.08 44.61 50.93 2.07 0.53 0.25 1.61 100

MEVE 42 1.03 71.22 11.24 7.52 1.92 2.36 5.75 100

PECO 1 0.22 64.77 30.50 2.13 0.54 0.39 1.68 100

PEFO 0 0.10 80.27 15.52 1.88 0.48 0.33 1.51 100

SAPE 5 0.39 35.83 58.54 2.43 0.62 0.71 1.87 100

WEEL 0 0.15 47.87 49.97 0.95 0.24 0.22 0.75 100

WEMI 1 0.27 29.69 65.44 2.10 0.54 0.62 1.62 100

WHPE 0 0.16 46.98 51.02 0.89 0.23 0.18 0.70 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.58 26.09 65.91 1.91 1.16 1.95 2.97 100

BAND 8 0.54 21.18 73.48 1.31 0.80 1.19 2.04 100

BLCA 3 0.39 31.74 65.45 0.70 0.43 0.55 1.12 100

CANY 13 0.72 29.11 60.16 2.49 1.52 2.85 3.87 100

CARE 3 0.31 86.04 1.21 3.09 1.88 2.94 4.84 100

GRCA 0 0.16 49.96 44.45 1.42 0.86 1.00 2.29 100

GRSA 1 0.17 25.45 72.07 0.69 0.42 0.28 1.09 100

LAGA 1 0.29 19.38 74.87 1.61 0.98 0.49 2.66 100

MABE 0 0.16 31.67 65.36 0.73 0.45 0.63 1.16 100

MEVE 60 1.66 38.26 45.78 3.66 2.23 4.39 5.68 100

PECO 3 0.36 20.30 74.98 1.21 0.74 0.82 1.96 100

PEFO 0 0.14 69.40 24.51 1.58 0.96 0.97 2.58 100

SAPE 13 0.64 24.73 67.13 1.92 1.17 2.07 2.99 100

WEEL 0 0.26 22.86 71.46 1.39 0.85 1.25 2.20 100

WEMI 4 0.44 37.67 57.85 1.06 0.65 1.12 1.65 100

WHPE 1 0.26 32.19 65.39 0.61 0.37 0.45 0.98 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.52 29.52 67.08 1.47 0.38 0.40 1.15 100

BAND 3 0.37 23.81 72.96 1.42 0.36 0.36 1.09 100

BLCA 0 0.28 25.40 72.77 0.80 0.21 0.19 0.64 100

CANY 12 0.57 38.31 60.22 0.65 0.17 0.14 0.52 100

CARE 2 0.23 31.25 65.23 1.54 0.39 0.39 1.20 100

GRCA 0 0.12 52.36 44.18 1.53 0.39 0.31 1.22 100

GRSA 1 0.14 27.01 70.46 1.13 0.29 0.22 0.89 100

LAGA 0 0.21 20.74 75.52 1.72 0.44 0.17 1.40 100

MABE 0 0.11 33.14 63.55 1.54 0.39 0.19 1.19 100

MEVE 48 1.26 41.89 48.65 4.03 1.03 1.33 3.08 100

PECO 1 0.27 46.68 51.28 0.92 0.24 0.15 0.73 100

PEFO 0 0.11 72.61 23.59 1.70 0.44 0.30 1.37 100

SAPE 7 0.50 26.73 68.43 2.09 0.53 0.62 1.60 100

WEEL 0 0.20 20.87 76.49 1.16 0.30 0.29 0.89 100

WEMI 3 0.35 45.70 42.79 4.98 1.28 1.43 3.82 100

WHPE 0 0.20 22.74 73.73 1.56 0.40 0.34 1.22 100

ROFA (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 7 0.46 56.20 41.83 0.87 0.22 0.19 0.69 100

BAND 1 0.31 28.05 68.15 1.67 0.43 0.42 1.28 100

BLCA 0 0.24 30.09 67.74 0.95 0.24 0.22 0.75 100

CANY 7 0.50 55.73 42.30 0.87 0.22 0.18 0.69 100

CARE 2 0.22 52.66 45.21 0.94 0.24 0.20 0.76 100

GRCA 0 0.12 93.96 1.09 2.19 0.56 0.45 1.74 100

GRSA 0 0.12 31.72 65.32 1.32 0.34 0.26 1.04 100

LAGA 0 0.18 40.46 56.75 1.23 0.31 0.29 0.95 100

MABE 0 0.09 38.48 57.67 1.79 0.46 0.22 1.39 100

MEVE 44 1.16 45.84 43.81 4.40 1.13 1.45 3.37 100

PECO 1 0.24 59.01 36.67 1.94 0.50 0.35 1.53 100

PEFO 0 0.10 90.13 5.97 1.74 0.45 0.32 1.39 100

SAPE 5 0.44 31.59 63.45 2.14 0.55 0.63 1.65 100

WEEL 0 0.17 41.61 56.51 0.83 0.21 0.19 0.65 100

WEMI 3 0.32 28.70 64.29 3.05 0.78 0.83 2.35 100

WHPE 0 0.18 92.03 4.39 1.63 0.42 0.27 1.26 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 1.04 37.90 59.89 0.56 0.35 0.41 0.89 100

BAND 9 0.53 76.32 16.85 1.73 1.07 1.30 2.73 100

BLCA 10 0.58 27.65 66.71 1.42 0.87 1.14 2.21 100

CANY 35 1.44 35.63 61.86 0.63 0.39 0.48 1.02 100

CARE 17 1.10 29.96 67.35 0.65 0.40 0.61 1.03 100

GRCA 7 0.48 30.18 67.22 0.65 0.40 0.53 1.03 100

GRSA 1 0.28 76.24 15.49 2.27 1.39 1.03 3.58 100

LAGA 4 0.40 39.72 57.57 0.70 0.43 0.45 1.13 100

MABE 1 0.24 35.97 61.92 0.56 0.35 0.32 0.89 100

MEVE 100 1.92 53.68 38.69 1.83 1.12 1.82 2.86 100

PECO 6 0.48 51.34 44.27 1.13 0.69 0.80 1.77 100

PEFO 5 0.43 86.46 10.06 0.89 0.55 0.62 1.42 100

SAPE 31 0.88 30.39 63.58 1.46 0.90 1.41 2.26 100

WEEL 6 0.38 37.70 56.66 1.47 0.91 0.92 2.33 100

WEMI 9 0.59 26.83 67.21 1.46 0.90 1.33 2.28 100

WHPE 5 0.37 29.53 67.67 0.74 0.45 0.44 1.17 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 0.89 35.30 62.84 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.66 100

BAND 3 0.39 26.98 70.54 1.12 0.28 0.21 0.87 100

BLCA 4 0.44 25.68 71.04 1.46 0.37 0.33 1.12 100

CANY 29 1.15 32.46 66.00 0.68 0.17 0.15 0.54 100

CARE 14 0.86 26.87 71.56 0.68 0.17 0.18 0.54 100

GRCA 5 0.35 27.44 70.95 0.71 0.18 0.17 0.56 100

GRSA 0 0.21 36.16 57.33 2.97 0.75 0.50 2.30 100

LAGA 1 0.29 25.67 70.62 1.64 0.42 0.37 1.27 100

MABE 0 0.20 33.23 64.11 1.21 0.30 0.21 0.95 100

MEVE 64 1.56 52.43 37.30 4.36 1.10 1.46 3.35 100

PECO 3 0.35 87.02 9.06 1.73 0.44 0.41 1.34 100

PEFO 2 0.29 85.92 11.67 1.07 0.27 0.21 0.85 100

SAPE 18 0.70 27.84 68.80 1.47 0.37 0.39 1.13 100

WEEL 4 0.30 34.05 62.90 1.38 0.35 0.24 1.08 100

WEMI 6 0.44 21.26 75.66 1.32 0.33 0.40 1.03 100

WHPE 2 0.28 27.58 70.65 0.80 0.20 0.14 0.63 100

Rotamix (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 16 0.78 40.87 56.94 0.97 0.24 0.20 0.77 100

BAND 1 0.31 31.84 64.02 1.90 0.48 0.31 1.46 100

BLCA 2 0.35 32.29 63.59 1.83 0.46 0.42 1.41 100

CANY 27 1.01 50.16 47.27 1.09 0.28 0.36 0.84 100

CARE 12 0.69 33.89 64.13 0.86 0.22 0.22 0.68 100

GRCA 4 0.28 39.91 57.90 0.97 0.24 0.20 0.78 100

GRSA 0 0.18 80.87 12.95 2.85 0.72 0.39 2.22 100

LAGA 0 0.26 83.22 12.07 2.09 0.53 0.47 1.62 100

MABE 0 0.16 41.46 55.21 1.50 0.38 0.26 1.18 100

MEVE 57 1.49 75.65 6.15 7.70 1.94 2.65 5.90 100

PECO 2 0.29 38.39 58.72 1.34 0.34 0.16 1.04 100

PEFO 2 0.27 34.09 63.66 0.97 0.25 0.28 0.76 100

SAPE 10 0.58 33.94 61.97 1.79 0.45 0.48 1.37 100

WEEL 1 0.24 42.36 53.85 1.72 0.43 0.30 1.34 100

WEMI 2 0.35 32.54 62.98 1.96 0.49 0.51 1.51 100

WHPE 2 0.22 64.93 30.18 2.18 0.55 0.46 1.69 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 1.04 37.90 59.89 0.56 0.35 0.41 0.89 100

BAND 9 0.53 76.32 16.85 1.73 1.07 1.30 2.73 100

BLCA 10 0.58 27.65 66.71 1.42 0.87 1.14 2.21 100

CANY 35 1.44 35.63 61.86 0.63 0.39 0.48 1.02 100

CARE 17 1.10 29.96 67.35 0.65 0.40 0.61 1.03 100

GRCA 7 0.48 30.18 67.22 0.65 0.40 0.53 1.03 100

GRSA 1 0.28 76.24 15.49 2.27 1.39 1.03 3.58 100

LAGA 4 0.40 39.72 57.57 0.70 0.43 0.45 1.13 100

MABE 1 0.24 35.97 61.92 0.56 0.35 0.32 0.89 100

MEVE 100 1.92 53.68 38.69 1.83 1.12 1.82 2.86 100

PECO 6 0.48 51.34 44.27 1.13 0.69 0.80 1.77 100

PEFO 5 0.43 86.46 10.06 0.89 0.55 0.62 1.42 100

SAPE 31 0.88 30.39 63.58 1.46 0.90 1.41 2.26 100

WEEL 6 0.38 37.70 56.66 1.47 0.91 0.92 2.33 100

WEMI 9 0.59 26.83 67.21 1.46 0.90 1.33 2.28 100

WHPE 5 0.37 29.53 67.67 0.74 0.45 0.44 1.17 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 0.89 35.30 62.84 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.66 100

BAND 3 0.39 26.98 70.54 1.12 0.28 0.21 0.87 100

BLCA 4 0.44 25.68 71.04 1.46 0.37 0.33 1.12 100

CANY 29 1.15 32.46 66.00 0.68 0.17 0.15 0.54 100

CARE 14 0.86 26.87 71.56 0.68 0.17 0.18 0.54 100

GRCA 5 0.35 27.44 70.95 0.71 0.18 0.17 0.56 100

GRSA 0 0.21 36.16 57.33 2.97 0.75 0.50 2.30 100

LAGA 1 0.29 25.67 70.62 1.64 0.42 0.37 1.27 100

MABE 0 0.20 33.23 64.11 1.21 0.30 0.21 0.95 100

MEVE 64 1.56 52.43 37.30 4.36 1.10 1.46 3.35 100

PECO 3 0.35 87.02 9.06 1.73 0.44 0.41 1.34 100

PEFO 2 0.29 85.92 11.67 1.07 0.27 0.21 0.85 100

SAPE 18 0.70 27.84 68.80 1.47 0.37 0.39 1.13 100

WEEL 4 0.30 34.05 62.90 1.38 0.35 0.24 1.08 100

WEMI 6 0.44 21.26 75.66 1.32 0.33 0.40 1.03 100

WHPE 2 0.28 27.58 70.65 0.80 0.20 0.14 0.63 100

ROFA/Rotamix (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 16 0.74 39.89 56.67 1.54 0.39 0.27 1.25 100

BAND 1 0.29 88.82 6.42 2.11 0.53 0.47 1.65 100

BLCA 2 0.32 35.09 60.43 1.99 0.50 0.46 1.53 100

CANY 24 0.97 51.91 45.43 1.13 0.29 0.37 0.87 100

CARE 11 0.64 36.89 60.95 0.94 0.24 0.24 0.74 100

GRCA 4 0.26 43.16 54.48 1.05 0.26 0.22 0.84 100

GRSA 0 0.18 82.37 11.35 2.90 0.73 0.39 2.26 100

LAGA 0 0.25 42.10 54.01 1.75 0.44 0.33 1.36 100

MABE 0 0.15 44.76 51.65 1.62 0.41 0.28 1.28 100

MEVE 49 1.49 75.96 5.77 7.73 1.95 2.66 5.93 100

PECO 2 0.27 54.32 42.15 1.60 0.40 0.29 1.24 100

PEFO 2 0.24 37.25 60.29 1.06 0.27 0.31 0.83 100

SAPE 9 0.54 36.60 58.99 1.93 0.49 0.51 1.48 100

WEEL 0 0.23 45.66 50.25 1.85 0.47 0.32 1.45 100

WEMI 2 0.33 45.02 48.15 2.98 0.75 0.81 2.29 100

WHPE 2 0.21 81.42 12.66 2.67 0.67 0.51 2.08 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 1.04 37.90 59.89 0.56 0.35 0.41 0.89 100

BAND 9 0.53 76.32 16.85 1.73 1.07 1.30 2.73 100

BLCA 10 0.58 27.65 66.71 1.42 0.87 1.14 2.21 100

CANY 35 1.44 35.63 61.86 0.63 0.39 0.48 1.02 100

CARE 17 1.10 29.96 67.35 0.65 0.40 0.61 1.03 100

GRCA 7 0.48 30.18 67.22 0.65 0.40 0.53 1.03 100

GRSA 1 0.28 76.24 15.49 2.27 1.39 1.03 3.58 100

LAGA 4 0.40 39.72 57.57 0.70 0.43 0.45 1.13 100

MABE 1 0.24 35.97 61.92 0.56 0.35 0.32 0.89 100

MEVE 100 1.92 53.68 38.69 1.83 1.12 1.82 2.86 100

PECO 6 0.48 51.34 44.27 1.13 0.69 0.80 1.77 100

PEFO 5 0.43 86.46 10.06 0.89 0.55 0.62 1.42 100

SAPE 31 0.88 30.39 63.58 1.46 0.90 1.41 2.26 100

WEEL 6 0.38 37.70 56.66 1.47 0.91 0.92 2.33 100

WEMI 9 0.59 26.83 67.21 1.46 0.90 1.33 2.28 100

WHPE 5 0.37 29.53 67.67 0.74 0.45 0.44 1.17 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 0.89 35.30 62.84 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.66 100

BAND 3 0.39 26.98 70.54 1.12 0.28 0.21 0.87 100

BLCA 4 0.44 25.68 71.04 1.46 0.37 0.33 1.12 100

CANY 29 1.15 32.46 66.00 0.68 0.17 0.15 0.54 100

CARE 14 0.86 26.87 71.56 0.68 0.17 0.18 0.54 100

GRCA 5 0.35 27.44 70.95 0.71 0.18 0.17 0.56 100

GRSA 0 0.21 36.16 57.33 2.97 0.75 0.50 2.30 100

LAGA 1 0.29 25.67 70.62 1.64 0.42 0.37 1.27 100

MABE 0 0.20 33.23 64.11 1.21 0.30 0.21 0.95 100

MEVE 64 1.56 52.43 37.30 4.36 1.10 1.46 3.35 100

PECO 3 0.35 87.02 9.06 1.73 0.44 0.41 1.34 100

PEFO 2 0.29 85.92 11.67 1.07 0.27 0.21 0.85 100

SAPE 18 0.70 27.84 68.80 1.47 0.37 0.39 1.13 100

WEEL 4 0.30 34.05 62.90 1.38 0.35 0.24 1.08 100

WEMI 6 0.44 21.26 75.66 1.32 0.33 0.40 1.03 100

WHPE 2 0.28 27.58 70.65 0.80 0.20 0.14 0.63 100

ROFA (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 17 0.82 38.90 59.01 0.92 0.23 0.20 0.74 100

BAND 1 0.34 29.35 66.83 1.75 0.44 0.28 1.35 100

BLCA 3 0.37 29.93 66.24 1.70 0.43 0.39 1.31 100

CANY 27 1.03 48.87 48.63 1.07 0.27 0.35 0.82 100

CARE 12 0.74 31.38 66.79 0.80 0.20 0.21 0.63 100

GRCA 4 0.30 37.13 60.83 0.90 0.23 0.19 0.72 100

GRSA 0 0.19 41.40 55.47 1.42 0.36 0.25 1.10 100

LAGA 0 0.26 81.85 13.52 2.05 0.52 0.47 1.60 100

MABE 0 0.17 38.59 58.31 1.40 0.35 0.24 1.10 100

MEVE 59 1.50 75.38 6.49 7.67 1.94 2.64 5.88 100

PECO 2 0.31 35.50 61.82 1.24 0.31 0.15 0.96 100

PEFO 2 0.29 88.23 9.30 1.10 0.28 0.22 0.87 100

SAPE 13 0.62 31.74 64.44 1.67 0.42 0.45 1.28 100

WEEL 1 0.26 39.48 56.99 1.60 0.40 0.28 1.25 100

WEMI 2 0.38 30.11 65.75 1.81 0.46 0.47 1.40 100

WHPE 2 0.24 32.70 65.19 0.95 0.24 0.16 0.75 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 15 0.81 31.17 63.37 1.30 0.80 1.33 2.03 100

BAND 20 0.81 28.33 63.99 1.89 1.16 1.69 2.94 100

BLCA 9 0.53 21.84 73.75 1.06 0.65 1.04 1.65 100

CANY 22 1.04 23.62 71.52 1.13 0.70 1.26 1.76 100

CARE 5 0.38 34.41 62.98 0.66 0.40 0.48 1.07 100

GRCA 3 0.33 45.95 51.86 0.55 0.34 0.36 0.92 100

GRSA 3 0.33 82.46 13.08 1.16 0.71 0.76 1.83 100

LAGA 5 0.44 25.09 67.37 1.91 1.17 1.50 2.97 100

MABE 0 0.25 28.79 63.57 2.12 1.30 0.81 3.42 100

MEVE 95 2.18 50.54 42.30 1.67 1.03 1.84 2.63 100

PECO 8 0.52 43.31 54.53 0.56 0.34 0.37 0.89 100

PEFO 5 0.25 91.13 1.98 1.75 1.08 1.27 2.80 100

SAPE 43 1.03 34.16 58.88 1.69 1.04 1.59 2.64 100

WEEL 5 0.42 34.33 58.68 1.81 1.11 1.22 2.86 100

WEMI 23 0.82 31.35 66.25 0.58 0.36 0.54 0.92 100

WHPE 3 0.39 33.90 60.27 1.53 0.94 0.95 2.41 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 12 0.65 29.26 66.96 1.65 0.42 0.45 1.27 100

BAND 10 0.57 52.51 41.86 2.54 0.64 0.47 1.97 100

BLCA 5 0.41 28.10 70.16 0.78 0.20 0.14 0.62 100

CANY 17 0.85 30.97 66.94 0.92 0.23 0.21 0.73 100

CARE 5 0.26 91.08 1.83 3.13 0.79 0.70 2.47 100

GRCA 3 0.24 42.65 55.95 0.62 0.16 0.12 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.24 27.92 70.46 0.73 0.18 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 1 0.33 22.49 73.90 1.64 0.41 0.29 1.26 100

MABE 0 0.18 27.59 70.65 0.80 0.20 0.13 0.63 100

MEVE 76 1.90 42.51 53.81 1.58 0.40 0.48 1.23 100

PECO 5 0.36 30.99 66.44 1.17 0.30 0.18 0.91 100

PEFO 3 0.18 28.46 69.86 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.61 100

SAPE 34 0.81 28.26 67.95 1.66 0.42 0.43 1.29 100

WEEL 4 0.33 32.22 63.43 1.95 0.49 0.38 1.52 100

WEMI 16 0.64 31.41 61.73 2.93 0.74 0.94 2.25 100

WHPE 0 0.31 44.36 54.39 0.55 0.14 0.11 0.44 100

Rotamix (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.53 36.25 59.06 2.04 0.51 0.56 1.57 100

BAND 6 0.49 38.40 58.77 1.25 0.32 0.28 0.98 100

BLCA 4 0.33 35.84 61.95 1.00 0.25 0.18 0.79 100

CANY 14 0.69 38.25 59.17 1.14 0.29 0.25 0.90 100

CARE 4 0.23 39.67 58.31 0.89 0.23 0.19 0.72 100

GRCA 1 0.20 51.57 46.74 0.75 0.19 0.14 0.61 100

GRSA 0 0.19 34.60 61.43 1.79 0.45 0.33 1.39 100

LAGA 0 0.27 39.99 58.06 0.86 0.22 0.18 0.68 100

MABE 0 0.15 35.85 58.03 2.83 0.71 0.30 2.27 100

MEVE 72 1.73 47.30 48.60 1.75 0.44 0.53 1.37 100

PECO 3 0.30 47.45 46.26 2.86 0.72 0.47 2.23 100

PEFO 0 0.17 93.56 1.58 2.16 0.55 0.44 1.71 100

SAPE 21 0.66 35.08 60.21 2.06 0.52 0.53 1.60 100

WEEL 1 0.26 40.25 54.36 2.42 0.61 0.47 1.89 100

WEMI 8 0.53 26.74 69.07 1.81 0.46 0.54 1.39 100

WHPE 0 0.26 53.43 45.07 0.67 0.17 0.13 0.53 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 15 0.81 31.17 63.37 1.30 0.80 1.33 2.03 100

BAND 20 0.81 28.33 63.99 1.89 1.16 1.69 2.94 100

BLCA 9 0.53 21.84 73.75 1.06 0.65 1.04 1.65 100

CANY 22 1.04 23.62 71.52 1.13 0.70 1.26 1.76 100

CARE 5 0.38 34.41 62.98 0.66 0.40 0.48 1.07 100

GRCA 3 0.33 45.95 51.86 0.55 0.34 0.36 0.92 100

GRSA 3 0.33 82.46 13.08 1.16 0.71 0.76 1.83 100

LAGA 5 0.44 25.09 67.37 1.91 1.17 1.50 2.97 100

MABE 0 0.25 28.79 63.57 2.12 1.30 0.81 3.42 100

MEVE 95 2.18 50.54 42.30 1.67 1.03 1.84 2.63 100

PECO 8 0.52 43.31 54.53 0.56 0.34 0.37 0.89 100

PEFO 5 0.25 91.13 1.98 1.75 1.08 1.27 2.80 100

SAPE 43 1.03 34.16 58.88 1.69 1.04 1.59 2.64 100

WEEL 5 0.42 34.33 58.68 1.81 1.11 1.22 2.86 100

WEMI 23 0.82 31.35 66.25 0.58 0.36 0.54 0.92 100

WHPE 3 0.39 33.90 60.27 1.53 0.94 0.95 2.41 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 12 0.65 29.26 66.96 1.65 0.42 0.45 1.27 100

BAND 10 0.57 52.51 41.86 2.54 0.64 0.47 1.97 100

BLCA 5 0.41 28.10 70.16 0.78 0.20 0.14 0.62 100

CANY 17 0.85 30.97 66.94 0.92 0.23 0.21 0.73 100

CARE 5 0.26 91.08 1.83 3.13 0.79 0.70 2.47 100

GRCA 3 0.24 42.65 55.95 0.62 0.16 0.12 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.24 27.92 70.46 0.73 0.18 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 1 0.33 22.49 73.90 1.64 0.41 0.29 1.26 100

MABE 0 0.18 27.59 70.65 0.80 0.20 0.13 0.63 100

MEVE 76 1.90 42.51 53.81 1.58 0.40 0.48 1.23 100

PECO 5 0.36 30.99 66.44 1.17 0.30 0.18 0.91 100

PEFO 3 0.18 28.46 69.86 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.61 100

SAPE 34 0.81 28.26 67.95 1.66 0.42 0.43 1.29 100

WEEL 4 0.33 32.22 63.43 1.95 0.49 0.38 1.52 100

WEMI 16 0.64 31.41 61.73 2.93 0.74 0.94 2.25 100

WHPE 0 0.31 44.36 54.39 0.55 0.14 0.11 0.44 100

ROFA/Rotamix (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 7 0.49 39.15 55.79 2.20 0.56 0.60 1.70 100

BAND 5 0.45 41.49 55.44 1.35 0.34 0.30 1.06 100

BLCA 4 0.30 39.05 58.55 1.08 0.27 0.20 0.86 100

CANY 11 0.64 41.32 55.90 1.23 0.31 0.27 0.97 100

CARE 3 0.21 42.95 54.86 0.97 0.24 0.20 0.78 100

GRCA 1 0.20 92.90 1.51 2.50 0.63 0.50 1.95 100

GRSA 0 0.19 90.29 6.12 1.63 0.41 0.26 1.29 100

LAGA 0 0.25 33.53 60.22 2.78 0.70 0.63 2.13 100

MABE 0 0.14 86.93 9.47 1.59 0.40 0.37 1.24 100

MEVE 67 1.66 49.26 46.47 1.83 0.46 0.55 1.42 100

PECO 3 0.28 50.42 42.90 3.04 0.77 0.50 2.37 100

PEFO 0 0.16 39.39 57.54 1.38 0.35 0.23 1.12 100

SAPE 18 0.63 65.57 29.23 2.31 0.58 0.54 1.77 100

WEEL 0 0.25 43.81 50.28 2.65 0.67 0.52 2.07 100

WEMI 7 0.48 29.34 66.06 1.98 0.50 0.59 1.52 100

WHPE 0 0.24 56.87 41.53 0.71 0.18 0.14 0.57 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 15 0.81 31.17 63.37 1.30 0.80 1.33 2.03 100

BAND 20 0.81 28.33 63.99 1.89 1.16 1.69 2.94 100

BLCA 9 0.53 21.84 73.75 1.06 0.65 1.04 1.65 100

CANY 22 1.04 23.62 71.52 1.13 0.70 1.26 1.76 100

CARE 5 0.38 34.41 62.98 0.66 0.40 0.48 1.07 100

GRCA 3 0.33 45.95 51.86 0.55 0.34 0.36 0.92 100

GRSA 3 0.33 82.46 13.08 1.16 0.71 0.76 1.83 100

LAGA 5 0.44 25.09 67.37 1.91 1.17 1.50 2.97 100

MABE 0 0.25 28.79 63.57 2.12 1.30 0.81 3.42 100

MEVE 95 2.18 50.54 42.30 1.67 1.03 1.84 2.63 100

PECO 8 0.52 43.31 54.53 0.56 0.34 0.37 0.89 100

PEFO 5 0.25 91.13 1.98 1.75 1.08 1.27 2.80 100

SAPE 43 1.03 34.16 58.88 1.69 1.04 1.59 2.64 100

WEEL 5 0.42 34.33 58.68 1.81 1.11 1.22 2.86 100

WEMI 23 0.82 31.35 66.25 0.58 0.36 0.54 0.92 100

WHPE 3 0.39 33.90 60.27 1.53 0.94 0.95 2.41 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 12 0.65 29.26 66.96 1.65 0.42 0.45 1.27 100

BAND 10 0.57 52.51 41.86 2.54 0.64 0.47 1.97 100

BLCA 5 0.41 28.10 70.16 0.78 0.20 0.14 0.62 100

CANY 17 0.85 30.97 66.94 0.92 0.23 0.21 0.73 100

CARE 5 0.26 91.08 1.83 3.13 0.79 0.70 2.47 100

GRCA 3 0.24 42.65 55.95 0.62 0.16 0.12 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.24 27.92 70.46 0.73 0.18 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 1 0.33 22.49 73.90 1.64 0.41 0.29 1.26 100

MABE 0 0.18 27.59 70.65 0.80 0.20 0.13 0.63 100

MEVE 76 1.90 42.51 53.81 1.58 0.40 0.48 1.23 100

PECO 5 0.36 30.99 66.44 1.17 0.30 0.18 0.91 100

PEFO 3 0.18 28.46 69.86 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.61 100

SAPE 34 0.81 28.26 67.95 1.66 0.42 0.43 1.29 100

WEEL 4 0.33 32.22 63.43 1.95 0.49 0.38 1.52 100

WEMI 16 0.64 31.41 61.73 2.93 0.74 0.94 2.25 100

WHPE 0 0.31 44.36 54.39 0.55 0.14 0.11 0.44 100

ROFA (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 10 0.56 33.79 61.85 1.90 0.48 0.52 1.47 100

BAND 8 0.52 57.62 36.21 2.79 0.70 0.51 2.17 100

BLCA 4 0.35 33.11 64.84 0.92 0.23 0.17 0.73 100

CANY 14 0.74 35.65 61.94 1.06 0.27 0.24 0.84 100

CARE 4 0.24 36.85 61.27 0.83 0.21 0.17 0.67 100

GRCA 1 0.21 48.54 49.87 0.70 0.18 0.13 0.58 100

GRSA 0 0.21 32.04 64.28 1.65 0.42 0.31 1.29 100

LAGA 0 0.29 83.45 12.84 1.68 0.42 0.28 1.32 100

MABE 0 0.16 33.33 60.98 2.63 0.66 0.28 2.11 100

MEVE 74 1.78 45.63 50.42 1.69 0.43 0.51 1.32 100

PECO 3 0.31 44.85 49.21 2.70 0.68 0.44 2.11 100

PEFO 0 0.17 93.36 1.80 2.16 0.54 0.44 1.70 100

SAPE 25 0.71 32.66 62.96 1.92 0.48 0.49 1.49 100

WEEL 1 0.28 37.24 57.73 2.25 0.57 0.44 1.76 100

WEMI 10 0.57 35.07 57.27 3.27 0.83 1.04 2.51 100

WHPE 0 0.27 50.36 48.23 0.63 0.16 0.13 0.50 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.72 30.15 61.20 2.06 1.26 2.13 3.19 100

BAND 15 0.71 23.24 69.03 1.92 1.18 1.63 2.99 100

BLCA 9 0.59 23.67 72.71 0.88 0.54 0.82 1.38 100

CANY 19 0.96 32.66 55.96 2.65 1.63 2.99 4.11 100

CARE 9 0.52 48.88 48.12 0.75 0.46 0.56 1.23 100

GRCA 3 0.26 91.93 1.11 1.76 1.08 1.29 2.83 100

GRSA 3 0.27 49.52 46.33 1.06 0.65 0.76 1.68 100

LAGA 5 0.43 22.09 71.73 1.75 1.07 0.58 2.78 100

MABE 0 0.25 27.57 67.94 1.12 0.69 0.91 1.76 100

MEVE 92 2.14 70.75 6.38 5.19 3.19 6.44 8.05 100

PECO 12 0.58 54.64 39.46 1.53 0.94 0.97 2.45 100

PEFO 1 0.24 88.09 6.50 1.41 0.87 0.86 2.28 100

SAPE 34 0.88 39.44 54.36 1.46 0.90 1.58 2.27 100

WEEL 4 0.38 22.78 73.96 0.83 0.51 0.60 1.31 100

WEMI 15 0.65 30.94 64.97 1.04 0.64 0.76 1.65 100

WHPE 4 0.37 24.02 69.82 1.56 0.96 1.20 2.46 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.66 29.12 65.81 2.19 0.55 0.65 1.68 100

BAND 8 0.61 31.91 64.13 1.75 0.44 0.40 1.36 100

BLCA 7 0.46 33.18 65.04 0.79 0.20 0.18 0.62 100

CANY 14 0.79 32.64 60.84 2.79 0.70 0.88 2.14 100

CARE 4 0.36 91.10 1.19 3.36 0.85 0.90 2.60 100

GRCA 0 0.19 52.76 43.76 1.54 0.39 0.32 1.23 100

GRSA 1 0.21 23.53 72.94 1.57 0.40 0.34 1.22 100

LAGA 3 0.33 21.25 74.88 1.79 0.45 0.16 1.47 100

MABE 0 0.18 22.58 74.94 1.09 0.27 0.27 0.85 100

MEVE 64 1.74 43.30 46.82 4.20 1.06 1.40 3.22 100

PECO 5 0.42 34.27 62.29 1.50 0.38 0.39 1.16 100

PEFO 1 0.17 72.31 23.90 1.69 0.43 0.30 1.36 100

SAPE 18 0.72 27.03 68.03 2.14 0.54 0.62 1.64 100

WEEL 2 0.35 23.08 74.48 1.07 0.27 0.28 0.83 100

WEMI 7 0.50 30.19 67.61 0.97 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

WHPE 2 0.28 90.86 5.64 1.60 0.40 0.26 1.24 100

Rotamix (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 8 0.54 35.92 57.81 2.71 0.68 0.80 2.08 100

BAND 7 0.49 29.39 66.38 1.85 0.47 0.48 1.43 100

BLCA 1 0.37 41.35 56.42 0.98 0.25 0.22 0.77 100

CANY 11 0.67 57.58 38.92 1.54 0.39 0.32 1.25 100

CARE 3 0.32 54.79 42.95 0.99 0.25 0.21 0.80 100

GRCA 0 0.18 94.11 0.94 2.19 0.55 0.46 1.74 100

GRSA 1 0.16 55.45 41.33 1.44 0.36 0.30 1.12 100

LAGA 1 0.26 45.37 51.98 1.19 0.30 0.22 0.95 100

MABE 0 0.14 29.06 67.75 1.40 0.35 0.35 1.09 100

MEVE 58 1.57 49.70 38.94 4.83 1.22 1.61 3.71 100

PECO 2 0.36 61.08 34.44 2.01 0.51 0.37 1.59 100

PEFO 0 0.16 90.72 5.35 1.77 0.45 0.31 1.41 100

SAPE 11 0.59 33.13 60.81 2.62 0.66 0.76 2.01 100

WEEL 0 0.27 29.50 67.38 1.36 0.34 0.36 1.06 100

WEMI 5 0.40 29.81 63.38 3.05 0.77 0.58 2.40 100

WHPE 1 0.23 29.86 65.52 2.05 0.52 0.44 1.61 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.72 30.15 61.20 2.06 1.26 2.13 3.19 100

BAND 15 0.71 23.24 69.03 1.92 1.18 1.63 2.99 100

BLCA 9 0.59 23.67 72.71 0.88 0.54 0.82 1.38 100

CANY 19 0.96 32.66 55.96 2.65 1.63 2.99 4.11 100

CARE 9 0.52 48.88 48.12 0.75 0.46 0.56 1.23 100

GRCA 3 0.26 91.93 1.11 1.76 1.08 1.29 2.83 100

GRSA 3 0.27 49.52 46.33 1.06 0.65 0.76 1.68 100

LAGA 5 0.43 22.09 71.73 1.75 1.07 0.58 2.78 100

MABE 0 0.25 27.57 67.94 1.12 0.69 0.91 1.76 100

MEVE 92 2.14 70.75 6.38 5.19 3.19 6.44 8.05 100

PECO 12 0.58 54.64 39.46 1.53 0.94 0.97 2.45 100

PEFO 1 0.24 88.09 6.50 1.41 0.87 0.86 2.28 100

SAPE 34 0.88 39.44 54.36 1.46 0.90 1.58 2.27 100

WEEL 4 0.38 22.78 73.96 0.83 0.51 0.60 1.31 100

WEMI 15 0.65 30.94 64.97 1.04 0.64 0.76 1.65 100

WHPE 4 0.37 24.02 69.82 1.56 0.96 1.20 2.46 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.66 29.12 65.81 2.19 0.55 0.65 1.68 100

BAND 8 0.61 31.91 64.13 1.75 0.44 0.40 1.36 100

BLCA 7 0.46 33.18 65.04 0.79 0.20 0.18 0.62 100

CANY 14 0.79 32.64 60.84 2.79 0.70 0.88 2.14 100

CARE 4 0.36 91.10 1.19 3.36 0.85 0.90 2.60 100

GRCA 0 0.19 52.76 43.76 1.54 0.39 0.32 1.23 100

GRSA 1 0.21 23.53 72.94 1.57 0.40 0.34 1.22 100

LAGA 3 0.33 21.25 74.88 1.79 0.45 0.16 1.47 100

MABE 0 0.18 22.58 74.94 1.09 0.27 0.27 0.85 100

MEVE 64 1.74 43.30 46.82 4.20 1.06 1.40 3.22 100

PECO 5 0.42 34.27 62.29 1.50 0.38 0.39 1.16 100

PEFO 1 0.17 72.31 23.90 1.69 0.43 0.30 1.36 100

SAPE 18 0.72 27.03 68.03 2.14 0.54 0.62 1.64 100

WEEL 2 0.35 23.08 74.48 1.07 0.27 0.28 0.83 100

WEMI 7 0.50 30.19 67.61 0.97 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

WHPE 2 0.28 90.86 5.64 1.60 0.40 0.26 1.24 100

ROFA/Rotamix (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 8 0.50 38.69 54.55 2.92 0.74 0.86 2.24 100

BAND 6 0.45 32.04 63.35 2.02 0.51 0.52 1.55 100

BLCA 1 0.34 44.67 52.92 1.06 0.27 0.24 0.83 100

CANY 11 0.63 50.45 47.62 0.85 0.22 0.18 0.68 100

CARE 2 0.30 58.25 39.35 1.05 0.27 0.22 0.86 100

GRCA 0 0.18 94.23 0.82 2.19 0.55 0.46 1.74 100

GRSA 1 0.15 58.75 37.84 1.52 0.38 0.31 1.19 100

LAGA 0 0.25 48.67 48.48 1.27 0.32 0.24 1.01 100

MABE 0 0.13 45.14 52.43 1.06 0.27 0.27 0.83 100

MEVE 57 1.51 51.79 36.37 5.03 1.27 1.68 3.86 100

PECO 1 0.34 64.12 31.18 2.11 0.53 0.38 1.67 100

PEFO 0 0.15 80.04 15.77 1.88 0.47 0.33 1.51 100

SAPE 11 0.55 35.74 57.73 2.83 0.71 0.82 2.17 100

WEEL 0 0.25 29.64 67.42 1.31 0.33 0.28 1.02 100

WEMI 3 0.37 32.44 60.16 3.32 0.84 0.64 2.61 100

WHPE 0 0.22 91.73 3.29 2.24 0.57 0.42 1.74 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.72 30.15 61.20 2.06 1.26 2.13 3.19 100

BAND 15 0.71 23.24 69.03 1.92 1.18 1.63 2.99 100

BLCA 9 0.59 23.67 72.71 0.88 0.54 0.82 1.38 100

CANY 19 0.96 32.66 55.96 2.65 1.63 2.99 4.11 100

CARE 9 0.52 48.88 48.12 0.75 0.46 0.56 1.23 100

GRCA 3 0.26 91.93 1.11 1.76 1.08 1.29 2.83 100

GRSA 3 0.27 49.52 46.33 1.06 0.65 0.76 1.68 100

LAGA 5 0.43 22.09 71.73 1.75 1.07 0.58 2.78 100

MABE 0 0.25 27.57 67.94 1.12 0.69 0.91 1.76 100

MEVE 92 2.14 70.75 6.38 5.19 3.19 6.44 8.05 100

PECO 12 0.58 54.64 39.46 1.53 0.94 0.97 2.45 100

PEFO 1 0.24 88.09 6.50 1.41 0.87 0.86 2.28 100

SAPE 34 0.88 39.44 54.36 1.46 0.90 1.58 2.27 100

WEEL 4 0.38 22.78 73.96 0.83 0.51 0.60 1.31 100

WEMI 15 0.65 30.94 64.97 1.04 0.64 0.76 1.65 100

WHPE 4 0.37 24.02 69.82 1.56 0.96 1.20 2.46 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.66 29.12 65.81 2.19 0.55 0.65 1.68 100

BAND 8 0.61 31.91 64.13 1.75 0.44 0.40 1.36 100

BLCA 7 0.46 33.18 65.04 0.79 0.20 0.18 0.62 100

CANY 14 0.79 32.64 60.84 2.79 0.70 0.88 2.14 100

CARE 4 0.36 91.10 1.19 3.36 0.85 0.90 2.60 100

GRCA 0 0.19 52.76 43.76 1.54 0.39 0.32 1.23 100

GRSA 1 0.21 23.53 72.94 1.57 0.40 0.34 1.22 100

LAGA 3 0.33 21.25 74.88 1.79 0.45 0.16 1.47 100

MABE 0 0.18 22.58 74.94 1.09 0.27 0.27 0.85 100

MEVE 64 1.74 43.30 46.82 4.20 1.06 1.40 3.22 100

PECO 5 0.42 34.27 62.29 1.50 0.38 0.39 1.16 100

PEFO 1 0.17 72.31 23.90 1.69 0.43 0.30 1.36 100

SAPE 18 0.72 27.03 68.03 2.14 0.54 0.62 1.64 100

WEEL 2 0.35 23.08 74.48 1.07 0.27 0.28 0.83 100

WEMI 7 0.50 30.19 67.61 0.97 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

WHPE 2 0.28 90.86 5.64 1.60 0.40 0.26 1.24 100

ROFA (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.58 33.56 60.58 2.53 0.64 0.75 1.95 100

BAND 8 0.53 27.20 68.89 1.71 0.43 0.44 1.32 100

BLCA 2 0.40 38.50 59.43 0.91 0.23 0.21 0.72 100

CANY 13 0.70 36.93 55.69 3.16 0.80 1.00 2.42 100

CARE 3 0.34 51.71 46.16 0.94 0.24 0.20 0.76 100

GRCA 0 0.18 93.99 1.07 2.19 0.55 0.46 1.74 100

GRSA 1 0.18 27.83 67.99 1.86 0.47 0.40 1.44 100

LAGA 1 0.28 42.50 55.01 1.11 0.28 0.21 0.89 100

MABE 0 0.15 26.73 70.33 1.29 0.33 0.32 1.00 100

MEVE 62 1.62 47.89 41.16 4.65 1.17 1.55 3.57 100

PECO 2 0.38 58.29 37.43 1.92 0.48 0.35 1.52 100

PEFO 0 0.16 90.06 6.04 1.75 0.44 0.31 1.40 100

SAPE 12 0.64 30.94 63.40 2.45 0.62 0.71 1.88 100

WEEL 0 0.30 27.20 69.93 1.25 0.32 0.33 0.98 100

WEMI 5 0.43 46.96 41.68 4.84 1.22 1.58 3.71 100

WHPE 2 0.25 27.52 68.22 1.89 0.48 0.41 1.48 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 1.05 38.73 59.14 0.54 0.33 0.40 0.86 100

BAND 9 0.54 77.25 16.22 1.66 1.02 1.24 2.61 100

BLCA 10 0.58 27.97 66.50 1.39 0.86 1.12 2.16 100

CANY 35 1.47 36.32 61.24 0.61 0.38 0.47 0.99 100

CARE 18 1.11 30.71 66.66 0.64 0.39 0.59 1.01 100

GRCA 7 0.48 31.01 66.45 0.63 0.39 0.51 1.00 100

GRSA 1 0.29 76.95 15.10 2.18 1.34 1.00 3.43 100

LAGA 4 0.40 40.66 56.73 0.68 0.42 0.44 1.09 100

MABE 1 0.24 69.36 25.32 1.36 0.84 0.94 2.18 100

MEVE 97 1.94 55.06 37.27 1.83 1.13 1.84 2.87 100

PECO 6 0.48 32.92 63.69 0.95 0.58 0.38 1.49 100

PEFO 5 0.44 29.28 67.84 0.68 0.42 0.71 1.07 100

SAPE 33 0.89 31.06 63.04 1.43 0.88 1.38 2.22 100

WEEL 6 0.38 38.50 56.07 1.42 0.88 0.88 2.25 100

WEMI 10 0.59 27.20 66.98 1.42 0.88 1.30 2.23 100

WHPE 5 0.37 30.24 67.03 0.72 0.44 0.43 1.14 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 0.88 35.06 63.08 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.66 100

BAND 3 0.38 26.97 70.54 1.12 0.29 0.20 0.87 100

BLCA 4 0.42 25.63 71.10 1.45 0.37 0.33 1.12 100

CANY 29 1.14 32.53 65.94 0.68 0.17 0.15 0.54 100

CARE 13 0.86 26.89 71.54 0.68 0.18 0.18 0.54 100

GRCA 5 0.36 27.72 70.68 0.70 0.18 0.16 0.55 100

GRSA 0 0.21 36.09 57.39 2.96 0.76 0.50 2.30 100

LAGA 1 0.28 36.17 62.10 0.77 0.20 0.14 0.61 100

MABE 0 0.20 33.07 64.29 1.19 0.31 0.21 0.94 100

MEVE 64 1.55 71.87 17.66 4.45 1.15 1.45 3.43 100

PECO 2 0.34 87.02 9.05 1.73 0.45 0.41 1.35 100

PEFO 2 0.29 85.93 11.66 1.07 0.28 0.21 0.85 100

SAPE 18 0.69 27.73 68.93 1.46 0.38 0.39 1.12 100

WEEL 4 0.30 33.81 63.19 1.36 0.35 0.23 1.07 100

WEMI 6 0.43 21.27 75.64 1.32 0.34 0.40 1.03 100

WHPE 2 0.28 27.76 70.47 0.80 0.21 0.13 0.63 100

Rotamix (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 16 0.77 40.70 57.11 0.96 0.25 0.21 0.77 100

BAND 1 0.30 31.87 63.98 1.89 0.49 0.30 1.47 100

BLCA 2 0.34 32.25 63.63 1.82 0.47 0.42 1.41 100

CANY 25 1.00 49.88 47.56 1.09 0.28 0.35 0.84 100

CARE 12 0.69 33.93 64.09 0.86 0.22 0.22 0.68 100

GRCA 4 0.28 35.23 62.74 0.89 0.23 0.21 0.70 100

GRSA 0 0.18 80.86 12.95 2.84 0.73 0.39 2.22 100

LAGA 0 0.25 83.24 12.04 2.08 0.54 0.47 1.63 100

MABE 0 0.16 41.26 55.45 1.48 0.38 0.26 1.17 100

MEVE 56 1.49 75.24 6.66 7.63 1.97 2.63 5.87 100

PECO 2 0.28 51.01 45.66 1.50 0.39 0.27 1.17 100

PEFO 2 0.26 34.06 63.67 0.97 0.25 0.28 0.76 100

SAPE 10 0.57 33.87 62.04 1.78 0.46 0.47 1.37 100

WEEL 1 0.24 42.07 54.19 1.69 0.43 0.29 1.33 100

WEMI 2 0.35 32.57 62.96 1.95 0.50 0.51 1.51 100

WHPE 2 0.22 35.71 62.01 1.03 0.27 0.17 0.81 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 1.05 38.73 59.14 0.54 0.33 0.40 0.86 100

BAND 9 0.54 77.25 16.22 1.66 1.02 1.24 2.61 100

BLCA 10 0.58 27.97 66.50 1.39 0.86 1.12 2.16 100

CANY 35 1.47 36.32 61.24 0.61 0.38 0.47 0.99 100

CARE 18 1.11 30.71 66.66 0.64 0.39 0.59 1.01 100

GRCA 7 0.48 31.01 66.45 0.63 0.39 0.51 1.00 100

GRSA 1 0.29 76.95 15.10 2.18 1.34 1.00 3.43 100

LAGA 4 0.40 40.66 56.73 0.68 0.42 0.44 1.09 100

MABE 1 0.24 69.36 25.32 1.36 0.84 0.94 2.18 100

MEVE 97 1.94 55.06 37.27 1.83 1.13 1.84 2.87 100

PECO 6 0.48 32.92 63.69 0.95 0.58 0.38 1.49 100

PEFO 5 0.44 29.28 67.84 0.68 0.42 0.71 1.07 100

SAPE 33 0.89 31.06 63.04 1.43 0.88 1.38 2.22 100

WEEL 6 0.38 38.50 56.07 1.42 0.88 0.88 2.25 100

WEMI 10 0.59 27.20 66.98 1.42 0.88 1.30 2.23 100

WHPE 5 0.37 30.24 67.03 0.72 0.44 0.43 1.14 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 0.88 35.06 63.08 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.66 100

BAND 3 0.38 26.97 70.54 1.12 0.29 0.20 0.87 100

BLCA 4 0.42 25.63 71.10 1.45 0.37 0.33 1.12 100

CANY 29 1.14 32.53 65.94 0.68 0.17 0.15 0.54 100

CARE 13 0.86 26.89 71.54 0.68 0.18 0.18 0.54 100

GRCA 5 0.36 27.72 70.68 0.70 0.18 0.16 0.55 100

GRSA 0 0.21 36.09 57.39 2.96 0.76 0.50 2.30 100

LAGA 1 0.28 36.17 62.10 0.77 0.20 0.14 0.61 100

MABE 0 0.20 33.07 64.29 1.19 0.31 0.21 0.94 100

MEVE 64 1.55 71.87 17.66 4.45 1.15 1.45 3.43 100

PECO 2 0.34 87.02 9.05 1.73 0.45 0.41 1.35 100

PEFO 2 0.29 85.93 11.66 1.07 0.28 0.21 0.85 100

SAPE 18 0.69 27.73 68.93 1.46 0.38 0.39 1.12 100

WEEL 4 0.30 33.81 63.19 1.36 0.35 0.23 1.07 100

WEMI 6 0.43 21.27 75.64 1.32 0.34 0.40 1.03 100

WHPE 2 0.28 27.76 70.47 0.80 0.21 0.13 0.63 100

ROFA/Rotamix (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 16 0.73 39.57 57.01 1.52 0.39 0.27 1.24 100

BAND 1 0.29 54.58 41.58 1.71 0.44 0.36 1.33 100

BLCA 2 0.31 35.06 60.46 1.98 0.51 0.45 1.53 100

CANY 24 0.97 51.67 45.67 1.13 0.29 0.37 0.87 100

CARE 10 0.64 36.94 60.90 0.93 0.24 0.24 0.74 100

GRCA 4 0.26 38.37 59.42 0.97 0.25 0.23 0.76 100

GRSA 0 0.18 82.33 11.37 2.90 0.75 0.39 2.26 100

LAGA 0 0.24 42.01 54.10 1.75 0.45 0.33 1.36 100

MABE 0 0.15 29.24 65.08 2.51 0.65 0.60 1.94 100

MEVE 46 1.48 75.58 6.24 7.66 1.97 2.64 5.90 100

PECO 2 0.27 54.29 42.16 1.60 0.41 0.29 1.25 100

PEFO 2 0.24 37.23 60.30 1.06 0.27 0.31 0.83 100

SAPE 8 0.53 36.55 59.05 1.92 0.49 0.51 1.48 100

WEEL 0 0.23 45.39 50.57 1.82 0.47 0.32 1.43 100

WEMI 2 0.32 44.95 48.22 2.97 0.76 0.81 2.29 100

WHPE 2 0.21 81.40 12.66 2.66 0.69 0.51 2.09 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 1.05 38.73 59.14 0.54 0.33 0.40 0.86 100

BAND 9 0.54 77.25 16.22 1.66 1.02 1.24 2.61 100

BLCA 10 0.58 27.97 66.50 1.39 0.86 1.12 2.16 100

CANY 35 1.47 36.32 61.24 0.61 0.38 0.47 0.99 100

CARE 18 1.11 30.71 66.66 0.64 0.39 0.59 1.01 100

GRCA 7 0.48 31.01 66.45 0.63 0.39 0.51 1.00 100

GRSA 1 0.29 76.95 15.10 2.18 1.34 1.00 3.43 100

LAGA 4 0.40 40.66 56.73 0.68 0.42 0.44 1.09 100

MABE 1 0.24 69.36 25.32 1.36 0.84 0.94 2.18 100

MEVE 97 1.94 55.06 37.27 1.83 1.13 1.84 2.87 100

PECO 6 0.48 32.92 63.69 0.95 0.58 0.38 1.49 100

PEFO 5 0.44 29.28 67.84 0.68 0.42 0.71 1.07 100

SAPE 33 0.89 31.06 63.04 1.43 0.88 1.38 2.22 100

WEEL 6 0.38 38.50 56.07 1.42 0.88 0.88 2.25 100

WEMI 10 0.59 27.20 66.98 1.42 0.88 1.30 2.23 100

WHPE 5 0.37 30.24 67.03 0.72 0.44 0.43 1.14 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 0.88 35.06 63.08 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.66 100

BAND 3 0.38 26.97 70.54 1.12 0.29 0.20 0.87 100

BLCA 4 0.42 25.63 71.10 1.45 0.37 0.33 1.12 100

CANY 29 1.14 32.53 65.94 0.68 0.17 0.15 0.54 100

CARE 13 0.86 26.89 71.54 0.68 0.18 0.18 0.54 100

GRCA 5 0.36 27.72 70.68 0.70 0.18 0.16 0.55 100

GRSA 0 0.21 36.09 57.39 2.96 0.76 0.50 2.30 100

LAGA 1 0.28 36.17 62.10 0.77 0.20 0.14 0.61 100

MABE 0 0.20 33.07 64.29 1.19 0.31 0.21 0.94 100

MEVE 64 1.55 71.87 17.66 4.45 1.15 1.45 3.43 100

PECO 2 0.34 87.02 9.05 1.73 0.45 0.41 1.35 100

PEFO 2 0.29 85.93 11.66 1.07 0.28 0.21 0.85 100

SAPE 18 0.69 27.73 68.93 1.46 0.38 0.39 1.12 100

WEEL 4 0.30 33.81 63.19 1.36 0.35 0.23 1.07 100

WEMI 6 0.43 21.27 75.64 1.32 0.34 0.40 1.03 100

WHPE 2 0.28 27.76 70.47 0.80 0.21 0.13 0.63 100

ROFA (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 17 0.81 39.61 56.55 1.70 0.44 0.29 1.41 100

BAND 1 0.33 29.25 66.95 1.73 0.45 0.28 1.34 100

BLCA 3 0.36 29.89 66.29 1.69 0.44 0.39 1.30 100

CANY 27 1.03 48.56 48.95 1.06 0.27 0.34 0.82 100

CARE 12 0.74 31.41 66.76 0.79 0.20 0.21 0.63 100

GRCA 4 0.31 32.57 65.55 0.82 0.21 0.19 0.65 100

GRSA 0 0.18 40.97 51.63 3.36 0.87 0.57 2.61 100

LAGA 0 0.26 81.87 13.49 2.05 0.53 0.47 1.60 100

MABE 0 0.17 38.41 58.52 1.38 0.36 0.24 1.09 100

MEVE 59 1.50 32.55 62.69 2.03 0.52 0.63 1.57 100

PECO 2 0.30 30.41 67.10 1.12 0.29 0.21 0.87 100

PEFO 2 0.28 88.24 9.29 1.10 0.28 0.22 0.87 100

SAPE 11 0.61 31.65 64.53 1.66 0.43 0.44 1.28 100

WEEL 1 0.26 39.21 57.31 1.57 0.41 0.27 1.23 100

WEMI 2 0.37 30.14 65.73 1.80 0.46 0.47 1.40 100

WHPE 2 0.24 32.90 65.00 0.95 0.24 0.16 0.75 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 15 0.84 33.46 63.61 0.73 0.45 0.58 1.17 100

BAND 20 0.81 53.16 38.54 2.16 1.33 1.41 3.39 100

BLCA 10 0.54 22.21 73.48 1.04 0.64 1.01 1.62 100

CANY 22 1.06 24.09 71.18 1.10 0.68 1.23 1.72 100

CARE 5 0.38 35.19 62.28 0.64 0.39 0.47 1.04 100

GRCA 3 0.34 47.06 50.82 0.54 0.33 0.35 0.90 100

GRSA 2 0.34 83.04 12.72 1.10 0.68 0.71 1.74 100

LAGA 4 0.45 81.97 13.16 1.28 0.79 0.74 2.05 100

MABE 0 0.25 28.95 63.55 2.07 1.28 0.79 3.36 100

MEVE 96 2.18 51.65 41.36 1.63 1.00 1.80 2.56 100

PECO 8 0.52 44.34 53.57 0.54 0.33 0.36 0.86 100

PEFO 5 0.27 91.57 1.90 1.66 1.02 1.20 2.65 100

SAPE 43 1.04 34.95 58.17 1.67 1.03 1.57 2.61 100

WEEL 5 0.43 35.21 57.78 1.81 1.12 1.23 2.86 100

WEMI 25 0.81 32.08 65.59 0.56 0.35 0.53 0.90 100

WHPE 4 0.41 34.54 59.79 1.49 0.92 0.93 2.35 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 12 0.65 29.14 67.09 1.64 0.42 0.45 1.27 100

BAND 10 0.56 52.56 41.80 2.54 0.65 0.47 1.98 100

BLCA 4 0.42 20.20 77.31 1.08 0.28 0.30 0.83 100

CANY 17 0.85 30.88 67.04 0.92 0.24 0.20 0.73 100

CARE 5 0.26 91.06 1.83 3.12 0.81 0.70 2.47 100

GRCA 3 0.24 42.57 56.03 0.62 0.16 0.12 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.23 28.00 70.38 0.73 0.19 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 1 0.32 22.47 73.91 1.64 0.42 0.29 1.27 100

MABE 0 0.19 28.63 66.47 2.26 0.58 0.24 1.82 100

MEVE 75 1.89 42.10 54.26 1.56 0.40 0.47 1.22 100

PECO 5 0.35 30.81 66.63 1.17 0.30 0.18 0.91 100

PEFO 3 0.18 28.47 69.84 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.61 100

SAPE 34 0.80 28.16 68.06 1.65 0.42 0.42 1.29 100

WEEL 4 0.33 24.93 71.68 1.47 0.38 0.41 1.13 100

WEMI 13 0.63 31.35 61.78 2.92 0.75 0.93 2.26 100

WHPE 0 0.30 44.20 54.55 0.55 0.14 0.11 0.44 100

Rotamix (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.53 36.12 59.19 2.03 0.52 0.55 1.57 100

BAND 6 0.47 38.36 58.82 1.25 0.32 0.28 0.98 100

BLCA 4 0.33 25.95 70.85 1.38 0.36 0.39 1.07 100

CANY 14 0.69 38.16 59.26 1.13 0.29 0.25 0.90 100

CARE 4 0.22 39.68 58.29 0.89 0.23 0.19 0.72 100

GRCA 1 0.20 51.48 46.83 0.75 0.19 0.14 0.62 100

GRSA 0 0.19 34.60 61.42 1.78 0.46 0.34 1.40 100

LAGA 0 0.27 40.02 58.03 0.86 0.22 0.18 0.68 100

MABE 0 0.15 41.76 53.67 2.05 0.53 0.37 1.62 100

MEVE 69 1.71 46.90 49.03 1.73 0.45 0.52 1.36 100

PECO 3 0.29 47.48 46.21 2.86 0.74 0.47 2.24 100

PEFO 0 0.17 93.56 1.58 2.16 0.56 0.44 1.71 100

SAPE 21 0.65 35.00 60.30 2.05 0.53 0.53 1.60 100

WEEL 1 0.26 31.62 64.09 1.86 0.48 0.51 1.44 100

WEMI 8 0.52 26.63 69.19 1.80 0.46 0.53 1.39 100

WHPE 0 0.25 37.48 60.78 0.77 0.20 0.15 0.62 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 15 0.84 33.46 63.61 0.73 0.45 0.58 1.17 100

BAND 20 0.81 53.16 38.54 2.16 1.33 1.41 3.39 100

BLCA 10 0.54 22.21 73.48 1.04 0.64 1.01 1.62 100

CANY 22 1.06 24.09 71.18 1.10 0.68 1.23 1.72 100

CARE 5 0.38 35.19 62.28 0.64 0.39 0.47 1.04 100

GRCA 3 0.34 47.06 50.82 0.54 0.33 0.35 0.90 100

GRSA 2 0.34 83.04 12.72 1.10 0.68 0.71 1.74 100

LAGA 4 0.45 81.97 13.16 1.28 0.79 0.74 2.05 100

MABE 0 0.25 28.95 63.55 2.07 1.28 0.79 3.36 100

MEVE 96 2.18 51.65 41.36 1.63 1.00 1.80 2.56 100

PECO 8 0.52 44.34 53.57 0.54 0.33 0.36 0.86 100

PEFO 5 0.27 91.57 1.90 1.66 1.02 1.20 2.65 100

SAPE 43 1.04 34.95 58.17 1.67 1.03 1.57 2.61 100

WEEL 5 0.43 35.21 57.78 1.81 1.12 1.23 2.86 100

WEMI 25 0.81 32.08 65.59 0.56 0.35 0.53 0.90 100

WHPE 4 0.41 34.54 59.79 1.49 0.92 0.93 2.35 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 12 0.65 29.14 67.09 1.64 0.42 0.45 1.27 100

BAND 10 0.56 52.56 41.80 2.54 0.65 0.47 1.98 100

BLCA 4 0.42 20.20 77.31 1.08 0.28 0.30 0.83 100

CANY 17 0.85 30.88 67.04 0.92 0.24 0.20 0.73 100

CARE 5 0.26 91.06 1.83 3.12 0.81 0.70 2.47 100

GRCA 3 0.24 42.57 56.03 0.62 0.16 0.12 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.23 28.00 70.38 0.73 0.19 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 1 0.32 22.47 73.91 1.64 0.42 0.29 1.27 100

MABE 0 0.19 28.63 66.47 2.26 0.58 0.24 1.82 100

MEVE 75 1.89 42.10 54.26 1.56 0.40 0.47 1.22 100

PECO 5 0.35 30.81 66.63 1.17 0.30 0.18 0.91 100

PEFO 3 0.18 28.47 69.84 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.61 100

SAPE 34 0.80 28.16 68.06 1.65 0.42 0.42 1.29 100

WEEL 4 0.33 24.93 71.68 1.47 0.38 0.41 1.13 100

WEMI 13 0.63 31.35 61.78 2.92 0.75 0.93 2.26 100

WHPE 0 0.30 44.20 54.55 0.55 0.14 0.11 0.44 100

ROFA/Rotamix (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 7 0.49 39.02 55.92 2.19 0.57 0.60 1.70 100

BAND 4 0.44 41.46 55.48 1.35 0.35 0.30 1.06 100

BLCA 4 0.30 39.09 58.51 1.08 0.28 0.20 0.86 100

CANY 10 0.64 41.23 55.98 1.22 0.32 0.27 0.97 100

CARE 3 0.21 42.97 54.84 0.97 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

GRCA 1 0.19 92.88 1.52 2.50 0.64 0.50 1.96 100

GRSA 0 0.19 90.26 6.13 1.63 0.42 0.26 1.29 100

LAGA 0 0.25 33.50 60.24 2.77 0.71 0.63 2.14 100

MABE 0 0.14 44.99 50.09 2.21 0.57 0.39 1.74 100

MEVE 66 1.65 48.88 46.89 1.81 0.47 0.55 1.42 100

PECO 3 0.28 50.46 42.84 3.04 0.78 0.50 2.38 100

PEFO 0 0.16 39.28 57.64 1.37 0.35 0.22 1.13 100

SAPE 16 0.62 65.20 29.60 2.29 0.59 0.54 1.77 100

WEEL 0 0.24 34.43 60.89 2.03 0.52 0.56 1.57 100

WEMI 6 0.48 29.23 66.18 1.97 0.51 0.59 1.52 100

WHPE 0 0.23 40.72 57.39 0.84 0.22 0.17 0.67 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 15 0.84 33.46 63.61 0.73 0.45 0.58 1.17 100

BAND 20 0.81 53.16 38.54 2.16 1.33 1.41 3.39 100

BLCA 10 0.54 22.21 73.48 1.04 0.64 1.01 1.62 100

CANY 22 1.06 24.09 71.18 1.10 0.68 1.23 1.72 100

CARE 5 0.38 35.19 62.28 0.64 0.39 0.47 1.04 100

GRCA 3 0.34 47.06 50.82 0.54 0.33 0.35 0.90 100

GRSA 2 0.34 83.04 12.72 1.10 0.68 0.71 1.74 100

LAGA 4 0.45 81.97 13.16 1.28 0.79 0.74 2.05 100

MABE 0 0.25 28.95 63.55 2.07 1.28 0.79 3.36 100

MEVE 96 2.18 51.65 41.36 1.63 1.00 1.80 2.56 100

PECO 8 0.52 44.34 53.57 0.54 0.33 0.36 0.86 100

PEFO 5 0.27 91.57 1.90 1.66 1.02 1.20 2.65 100

SAPE 43 1.04 34.95 58.17 1.67 1.03 1.57 2.61 100

WEEL 5 0.43 35.21 57.78 1.81 1.12 1.23 2.86 100

WEMI 25 0.81 32.08 65.59 0.56 0.35 0.53 0.90 100

WHPE 4 0.41 34.54 59.79 1.49 0.92 0.93 2.35 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 12 0.65 29.14 67.09 1.64 0.42 0.45 1.27 100

BAND 10 0.56 52.56 41.80 2.54 0.65 0.47 1.98 100

BLCA 4 0.42 20.20 77.31 1.08 0.28 0.30 0.83 100

CANY 17 0.85 30.88 67.04 0.92 0.24 0.20 0.73 100

CARE 5 0.26 91.06 1.83 3.12 0.81 0.70 2.47 100

GRCA 3 0.24 42.57 56.03 0.62 0.16 0.12 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.23 28.00 70.38 0.73 0.19 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 1 0.32 22.47 73.91 1.64 0.42 0.29 1.27 100

MABE 0 0.19 28.63 66.47 2.26 0.58 0.24 1.82 100

MEVE 75 1.89 42.10 54.26 1.56 0.40 0.47 1.22 100

PECO 5 0.35 30.81 66.63 1.17 0.30 0.18 0.91 100

PEFO 3 0.18 28.47 69.84 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.61 100

SAPE 34 0.80 28.16 68.06 1.65 0.42 0.42 1.29 100

WEEL 4 0.33 24.93 71.68 1.47 0.38 0.41 1.13 100

WEMI 13 0.63 31.35 61.78 2.92 0.75 0.93 2.26 100

WHPE 0 0.30 44.20 54.55 0.55 0.14 0.11 0.44 100

ROFA (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 10 0.57 33.66 61.98 1.89 0.49 0.52 1.47 100

BAND 8 0.51 35.71 61.66 1.16 0.30 0.26 0.91 100

BLCA 4 0.35 23.86 73.19 1.27 0.33 0.36 0.98 100

CANY 14 0.74 35.57 62.03 1.06 0.27 0.23 0.84 100

CARE 4 0.24 36.87 61.25 0.83 0.21 0.17 0.67 100

GRCA 1 0.21 48.44 49.97 0.70 0.18 0.13 0.58 100

GRSA 0 0.20 32.04 64.27 1.65 0.43 0.31 1.29 100

LAGA 0 0.28 83.41 12.86 1.68 0.43 0.28 1.33 100

MABE 0 0.16 38.96 56.78 1.92 0.49 0.34 1.51 100

MEVE 74 1.77 45.22 50.86 1.67 0.43 0.51 1.31 100

PECO 3 0.31 44.88 49.17 2.70 0.70 0.44 2.12 100

PEFO 0 0.17 93.36 1.79 2.15 0.55 0.44 1.70 100

SAPE 25 0.69 32.58 63.05 1.90 0.49 0.49 1.49 100

WEEL 2 0.28 29.24 66.78 1.72 0.44 0.48 1.33 100

WEMI 9 0.57 24.47 71.69 1.65 0.43 0.49 1.28 100

WHPE 0 0.27 50.19 48.39 0.63 0.16 0.13 0.50 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.74 30.46 60.93 2.04 1.26 2.14 3.18 100

BAND 15 0.71 23.48 68.94 1.88 1.16 1.60 2.93 100

BLCA 9 0.59 37.08 55.34 1.83 1.13 1.78 2.84 100

CANY 20 0.97 32.92 55.93 2.59 1.60 2.93 4.03 100

CARE 9 0.53 49.90 47.20 0.72 0.45 0.54 1.19 100

GRCA 3 0.27 92.31 1.07 1.68 1.03 1.22 2.69 100

GRSA 3 0.27 24.99 69.23 1.46 0.90 1.12 2.30 100

LAGA 5 0.43 22.20 71.74 1.71 1.06 0.56 2.72 100

MABE 0 0.24 24.98 71.07 0.97 0.60 0.87 1.52 100

MEVE 93 2.15 71.14 6.46 5.08 3.13 6.31 7.88 100

PECO 12 0.59 55.50 38.80 1.48 0.91 0.94 2.37 100

PEFO 1 0.25 88.57 6.28 1.34 0.83 0.81 2.17 100

SAPE 35 0.88 28.38 62.72 2.09 1.29 2.27 3.25 100

WEEL 5 0.39 23.21 73.59 0.82 0.50 0.58 1.29 100

WEMI 15 0.65 31.61 64.42 1.01 0.63 0.73 1.61 100

WHPE 4 0.38 24.18 69.77 1.52 0.94 1.18 2.41 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.63 28.93 66.06 2.16 0.56 0.63 1.67 100

BAND 8 0.60 23.30 73.35 1.46 0.38 0.38 1.13 100

BLCA 7 0.44 33.38 64.83 0.79 0.20 0.18 0.62 100

CANY 13 0.78 32.54 60.94 2.78 0.72 0.88 2.14 100

CARE 4 0.35 91.08 1.19 3.35 0.86 0.90 2.61 100

GRCA 0 0.18 52.85 43.67 1.54 0.40 0.32 1.23 100

GRSA 1 0.21 23.53 72.93 1.57 0.41 0.34 1.23 100

LAGA 3 0.32 21.23 74.90 1.79 0.46 0.16 1.47 100

MABE 0 0.18 22.92 75.41 0.73 0.19 0.18 0.57 100

MEVE 63 1.73 44.56 45.24 4.32 1.11 1.44 3.33 100

PECO 5 0.41 52.81 43.33 1.73 0.45 0.31 1.38 100

PEFO 1 0.17 31.86 65.63 1.13 0.29 0.18 0.92 100

SAPE 17 0.69 26.79 68.32 2.10 0.54 0.62 1.62 100

WEEL 1 0.33 23.22 75.05 0.76 0.19 0.19 0.59 100

WEMI 6 0.49 30.25 67.54 0.97 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

WHPE 2 0.28 90.85 5.63 1.59 0.41 0.26 1.24 100

Rotamix (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 8 0.51 35.67 58.15 2.66 0.69 0.77 2.06 100

BAND 7 0.48 29.38 66.39 1.85 0.48 0.48 1.43 100

BLCA 1 0.36 40.98 53.38 2.46 0.63 0.65 1.90 100

CANY 11 0.66 57.43 39.07 1.54 0.40 0.32 1.25 100

CARE 3 0.32 54.80 42.94 0.99 0.26 0.21 0.81 100

GRCA 0 0.17 94.11 0.94 2.18 0.56 0.46 1.74 100

GRSA 1 0.16 30.20 65.25 2.02 0.52 0.44 1.57 100

LAGA 0 0.25 27.42 67.58 2.31 0.59 0.20 1.89 100

MABE 0 0.14 41.88 55.87 0.98 0.25 0.25 0.77 100

MEVE 58 1.56 49.78 38.83 4.82 1.24 1.61 3.72 100

PECO 2 0.35 61.23 34.29 2.00 0.52 0.37 1.59 100

PEFO 0 0.15 90.72 5.35 1.76 0.45 0.31 1.41 100

SAPE 11 0.57 41.14 53.10 2.49 0.64 0.70 1.92 100

WEEL 0 0.26 30.06 67.70 0.98 0.25 0.25 0.77 100

WEMI 5 0.39 29.77 63.42 3.04 0.78 0.59 2.40 100

WHPE 1 0.23 29.84 65.53 2.05 0.53 0.44 1.61 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.74 30.46 60.93 2.04 1.26 2.14 3.18 100

BAND 15 0.71 23.48 68.94 1.88 1.16 1.60 2.93 100

BLCA 9 0.59 37.08 55.34 1.83 1.13 1.78 2.84 100

CANY 20 0.97 32.92 55.93 2.59 1.60 2.93 4.03 100

CARE 9 0.53 49.90 47.20 0.72 0.45 0.54 1.19 100

GRCA 3 0.27 92.31 1.07 1.68 1.03 1.22 2.69 100

GRSA 3 0.27 24.99 69.23 1.46 0.90 1.12 2.30 100

LAGA 5 0.43 22.20 71.74 1.71 1.06 0.56 2.72 100

MABE 0 0.24 24.98 71.07 0.97 0.60 0.87 1.52 100

MEVE 93 2.15 71.14 6.46 5.08 3.13 6.31 7.88 100

PECO 12 0.59 55.50 38.80 1.48 0.91 0.94 2.37 100

PEFO 1 0.25 88.57 6.28 1.34 0.83 0.81 2.17 100

SAPE 35 0.88 28.38 62.72 2.09 1.29 2.27 3.25 100

WEEL 5 0.39 23.21 73.59 0.82 0.50 0.58 1.29 100

WEMI 15 0.65 31.61 64.42 1.01 0.63 0.73 1.61 100

WHPE 4 0.38 24.18 69.77 1.52 0.94 1.18 2.41 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.63 28.93 66.06 2.16 0.56 0.63 1.67 100

BAND 8 0.60 23.30 73.35 1.46 0.38 0.38 1.13 100

BLCA 7 0.44 33.38 64.83 0.79 0.20 0.18 0.62 100

CANY 13 0.78 32.54 60.94 2.78 0.72 0.88 2.14 100

CARE 4 0.35 91.08 1.19 3.35 0.86 0.90 2.61 100

GRCA 0 0.18 52.85 43.67 1.54 0.40 0.32 1.23 100

GRSA 1 0.21 23.53 72.93 1.57 0.41 0.34 1.23 100

LAGA 3 0.32 21.23 74.90 1.79 0.46 0.16 1.47 100

MABE 0 0.18 22.92 75.41 0.73 0.19 0.18 0.57 100

MEVE 63 1.73 44.56 45.24 4.32 1.11 1.44 3.33 100

PECO 5 0.41 52.81 43.33 1.73 0.45 0.31 1.38 100

PEFO 1 0.17 31.86 65.63 1.13 0.29 0.18 0.92 100

SAPE 17 0.69 26.79 68.32 2.10 0.54 0.62 1.62 100

WEEL 1 0.33 23.22 75.05 0.76 0.19 0.19 0.59 100

WEMI 6 0.49 30.25 67.54 0.97 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

WHPE 2 0.28 90.85 5.63 1.59 0.41 0.26 1.24 100

ROFA/Rotamix (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 7 0.48 38.45 54.89 2.87 0.74 0.84 2.22 100

BAND 5 0.44 32.03 63.36 2.01 0.52 0.52 1.56 100

BLCA 1 0.34 56.06 38.77 2.24 0.58 0.61 1.74 100

CANY 11 0.62 50.43 47.63 0.85 0.22 0.18 0.68 100

CARE 2 0.30 58.26 39.34 1.05 0.27 0.22 0.86 100

GRCA 0 0.17 94.23 0.82 2.19 0.56 0.46 1.74 100

GRSA 1 0.15 58.91 37.65 1.53 0.39 0.32 1.20 100

LAGA 0 0.23 49.10 48.11 1.25 0.32 0.22 1.00 100

MABE 0 0.13 45.26 52.30 1.06 0.27 0.27 0.83 100

MEVE 57 1.50 51.86 36.27 5.03 1.30 1.68 3.87 100

PECO 1 0.34 64.27 31.03 2.10 0.54 0.38 1.67 100

PEFO 0 0.15 80.05 15.75 1.87 0.48 0.33 1.51 100

SAPE 11 0.53 43.95 49.90 2.66 0.69 0.75 2.05 100

WEEL 0 0.23 32.98 64.56 1.07 0.28 0.27 0.84 100

WEMI 3 0.36 32.40 60.19 3.31 0.85 0.64 2.61 100

WHPE 0 0.21 91.72 3.30 2.24 0.58 0.42 1.74 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree (3)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.74 30.46 60.93 2.04 1.26 2.14 3.18 100

BAND 15 0.71 23.48 68.94 1.88 1.16 1.60 2.93 100

BLCA 9 0.59 37.08 55.34 1.83 1.13 1.78 2.84 100

CANY 20 0.97 32.92 55.93 2.59 1.60 2.93 4.03 100

CARE 9 0.53 49.90 47.20 0.72 0.45 0.54 1.19 100

GRCA 3 0.27 92.31 1.07 1.68 1.03 1.22 2.69 100

GRSA 3 0.27 24.99 69.23 1.46 0.90 1.12 2.30 100

LAGA 5 0.43 22.20 71.74 1.71 1.06 0.56 2.72 100

MABE 0 0.24 24.98 71.07 0.97 0.60 0.87 1.52 100

MEVE 93 2.15 71.14 6.46 5.08 3.13 6.31 7.88 100

PECO 12 0.59 55.50 38.80 1.48 0.91 0.94 2.37 100

PEFO 1 0.25 88.57 6.28 1.34 0.83 0.81 2.17 100

SAPE 35 0.88 28.38 62.72 2.09 1.29 2.27 3.25 100

WEEL 5 0.39 23.21 73.59 0.82 0.50 0.58 1.29 100

WEMI 15 0.65 31.61 64.42 1.01 0.63 0.73 1.61 100

WHPE 4 0.38 24.18 69.77 1.52 0.94 1.18 2.41 100

Baseline - Consent Decree (2)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.63 28.93 66.06 2.16 0.56 0.63 1.67 100

BAND 8 0.60 23.30 73.35 1.46 0.38 0.38 1.13 100

BLCA 7 0.44 33.38 64.83 0.79 0.20 0.18 0.62 100

CANY 13 0.78 32.54 60.94 2.78 0.72 0.88 2.14 100

CARE 4 0.35 91.08 1.19 3.35 0.86 0.90 2.61 100

GRCA 0 0.18 52.85 43.67 1.54 0.40 0.32 1.23 100

GRSA 1 0.21 23.53 72.93 1.57 0.41 0.34 1.23 100

LAGA 3 0.32 21.23 74.90 1.79 0.46 0.16 1.47 100

MABE 0 0.18 22.92 75.41 0.73 0.19 0.18 0.57 100

MEVE 63 1.73 44.56 45.24 4.32 1.11 1.44 3.33 100

PECO 5 0.41 52.81 43.33 1.73 0.45 0.31 1.38 100

PEFO 1 0.17 31.86 65.63 1.13 0.29 0.18 0.92 100

SAPE 17 0.69 26.79 68.32 2.10 0.54 0.62 1.62 100

WEEL 1 0.33 23.22 75.05 0.76 0.19 0.19 0.59 100

WEMI 6 0.49 30.25 67.54 0.97 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

WHPE 2 0.28 90.85 5.63 1.59 0.41 0.26 1.24 100

ROFA (1)

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.55 33.30 60.93 2.49 0.64 0.72 1.92 100

BAND 8 0.52 27.18 68.91 1.71 0.44 0.44 1.32 100

BLCA 1 0.38 38.73 59.20 0.91 0.24 0.21 0.72 100

CANY 13 0.69 52.63 43.93 1.50 0.39 0.35 1.20 100

CARE 3 0.33 51.72 46.15 0.93 0.24 0.20 0.76 100

GRCA 0 0.17 93.99 1.07 2.18 0.56 0.46 1.74 100

GRSA 1 0.17 27.83 67.98 1.86 0.48 0.40 1.45 100

LAGA 1 0.27 25.21 70.19 2.12 0.55 0.19 1.74 100

MABE 0 0.15 38.95 58.95 0.91 0.24 0.23 0.72 100

MEVE 61 1.62 47.97 41.05 4.65 1.20 1.55 3.58 100

PECO 2 0.37 58.46 37.27 1.91 0.49 0.35 1.52 100

PEFO 0 0.15 90.06 6.03 1.75 0.45 0.31 1.40 100

SAPE 12 0.60 38.75 55.83 2.34 0.60 0.66 1.81 100

WEEL 0 0.28 27.61 70.32 0.90 0.23 0.23 0.71 100

WEMI 5 0.42 46.89 41.75 4.82 1.24 1.58 3.72 100

WHPE 1 0.24 27.50 68.23 1.89 0.49 0.40 1.49 100

Identification of Available 

PNM San Juan Generating Station PM Control Technologies 

080828 1-1 

1.0 Identification of Available PM Control Technologies 

1.1 Available PM Control Technologies 

PM control technologies that were identified as available for retrofit at SJGS are 

listed below. Only post-combustion control is available for PM control. A short 

summary of each technology is included in the following sub-sections: 

− Pulse Jet Fabric Filter 

− Wet Electrostatic Precipitator (WESP) 

1.1.1 Pulse Jet Fabric Filter (PJFF) 

As part of the consent decree environmental upgrade project, a PJFF system will 

be installed on each of the four units at SJGS. The PJFFs will be installed downstream of 

the existing hot-side ESPs and air heaters, and upstream of the wet flue gas 

desulfurization (FGD) system. After the commissioning of the PJFF, the hot-side ESP 

will be de-energized. 

 In addition to particulate removal, the PJFF system being installed is also part of 

the emission control system for Hg emission reduction. Activated carbon will be injected 

into the flue gas downstream of the air heater for adsorption of Hg in the flue gas. The 

PJFF is used to capture the Hg-laden activated carbon and other PM. 

The PJFF outlet will be connected to the existing wet FGD system for SO2

emissions removal from flue gas. The wet FGD system is equipped with mist eliminators 

for the removal of entrained moisture droplet, which might also contain unreacted reagent 

(limestone particle in the slurry) from the FGD or byproduct particulates (calcium sulfite 

or calcium sulfate). These are also known as re-entrained scrubber solids. 

While the control effectiveness of the PJFF is usually defined by vendors at the 

outlet ductwork of the PJFF, the BART determination is based on the control 

effectiveness for particulate matter at the stack outlet. Therefore, the particulate matter 

emission rate has to take into account both the removal efficiency of the PJFF and the 

impacts of the wet FGD operation, where there is a potential for additional re-entrainment 

of scrubber solids into the flue gas, which increases the stack outlet particulate matter 

emission concentration. In this BART determination for particulate matter, the control 

effectiveness defined for the PJFF installed at SJGS for consent decree requirements, 

takes into account the impacts of operating the wet FGD system. The overall particulate 

matter emissions will be the cumulative removal efficiency of the consent decree PJFF 

and the mist eliminators of the wet FGD. 
Identification of Available 

PNM San Juan Generating Station PM Control Technologies 

080828 1-2 

1.1.2 Wet Electrostatic Precipitator (WESP) 

A WESP collects particles on the same theoretical basis as a dry ESP: negatively 

charged particles are collected on positively charged surfaces. However, the collecting 

surfaces are wet instead of dry and are flushed with water to remove the particulate. 

Typically, a WESP is installed downstream of an existing wet FGD system where the 

flue gas is already saturated, so the amount of added water is minimized. The particulate 

collection efficiency is enhanced by a lack of re-entrainment after contact with the wet 

walls (as contrasted with re-entrainment due to rapping on a dry ESP). Therefore, the 

WESP can remove fine particulate or acid mist applications because it reduces opacity, 

sulfuric acid mist (H2SO4), and other aerosols. 

A WESP can be installed in either horizontal or vertical gas flow orientation. In a 

horizontal gas flow orientation, a WESP is similar to a common dry ESP, and is located 

on the grade elevation of the plant. Vertical gas flow WESPs are usually of the tubular 

collection plate type, and is typically used if installed as part of the wet FGD absorber 

module. Since the existing wet FGD system at SJGS consists of a multiple absorber 

tower arrangement, the vertical flow wet ESP was not selected as it is more suited for 

retrofit on wet FGD systems with a single absorber tower. The horizontal flow wet ESP 

is therefore considered as the baseline design for this analysis. 

The WESP will be installed downstream of the existing wet FGD system with the 

consent decree PJFF in operation to remove a significant amount of particulate matter 

prior to the flue gas entering the wet FGD system. The moisture saturated flue gas at the 

wet FGD outlet will then be flowed through the WESP for additional particulate matter 

removal. In addition to PM, condensible particulate matter (including acid mist), will be 

effectively removed at the WESP. 

An alternative WESP arrangement where it is located upstream of the wet FGD 

system with the consent decree PJFF decommissioned was not considered for the 

following reasons. The inlet ductwork into the WESP would need to have a quenching 

system to saturate flue gas with moisture. The WESP casing would also have to be larger 

as more electrical fields would be needed for the higher particulate loading. A larger 

quantity of collected particulate matter from the WESP would also have to be removed 

from the collector plate wash water. Due to the increase in WESP casing size and retrofit 

complexity of the additional flue gas quenching and wash water treatment system, this 

arrangement for the WESP was not considered. In addition to that, the treated flue gas 

from the WESP will flow through the wet FGD system, where impacts of the wet FGD 

operations, as described in Subsection 1.1.1 will increase the stack outlet PM emission 

concentration. 
Technical Feasibility of 

PNM San Juan Generating Station PM Control Technologies 

080828 2-1 

2.0 Technical Feasibility of PM Control Technologies 

2.1 Technically Feasible PM Control Technologies 

In the process of eliminating technically infeasible alternatives, it is necessary to 

demonstrate that a technology is not applicable or not available for application at the 

source. This demonstration is made by showing that the technology is commercially 

unavailable and/or there are insurmountable technical difficulties with applying the 

technology to the applicable unit. Other factors that are considered when determining the 

technical feasibility of a technology include the following: 

− Size of the unit. 

− Location of the proposed technology. 

− Operating problems after retrofit of technology. 

− Space constraints. 

− Reliability. 

− Adverse effects on the rest of the facility. 

− Adverse community impacts. 

Additionally, a technology is technically infeasible if its level of emissions control 

does not achieve the required permit emissions limit applied to the source by the 

regulating agency. Finally, if there are multiple control technologies that have an 

equivalent level of control, the BART procedure allows for the consideration of the less 

costly control technology, therefore eliminating the need to evaluate higher cost 

technologies. 

For all the PM control technologies identified as available, a determination was 

made regarding the technical feasibility of the technology at the SJGS site on the basis of 

the criteria highlighted above. 

2.1.1 PJFF 

The PJFF is currently being installed at SJGS for the consent decree 

environmental upgrade project. Therefore, this technology combination is technically 

feasible for the reduction of PM emissions. 

2.1.2 WESP 

The WESP technology is based on the fundamentals of the ESP technology. 

WESP have also been installed in flue gas streams downstream of a Wet FGD for the 

removal of PM. Therefore, this technology is technically feasible. 
T

PNM San Juan Generating Station PM 080828 2.2 Technical Feasibility Summary 

Table 2-1 

Technically Feasible PM Control Technology Alternatives 

Pollutant Philosophy Technology 

Technically Feasible and Applicable? Remarks/Reasons for Techn

PM Control Technologies: PJFF Yes In the process of being insta

Consent Decree with existinoperation. 

WESP Yes Technically feasible arrange

operating the Consent Decrewet FGD system. 
Evaluation of Technically Feasible 

PNM San Juan Generating Station PM Control Technology 

080828 3-1 

3.0 Evaluation of Technically Feasible Retrofit PM Emissions 

Control Technologies 

 This section discusses the control effectiveness evaluation of technically feasible 

PM control technologies beyond that achieved currently by the newly installed PJFF for 

the consent decree. 

3.1 Control Effectiveness 

The evaluation process in Step 3 determines the control effectiveness of the 

technically feasible PM control technologies. Control effectiveness is expressed in a 

common metric based on the amount of pollutant generated per unit of heat input 

(lb/MBtu). The evaluation of the control effectiveness was translated into an hourly rate 

(lb/h) for each pollutant, according to the design basis heat input data for each SJGS unit. 

The evaluation of control effectiveness was based on information indicated in Subsection 

1.2.3. 

Table 3-1 indicates the control effectiveness of each PM control technology. This 

control effectiveness was calculated from the consent decree values established for front 

half, filterable particulate matter at 0.015 lb/MBtu. 

The control effectiveness for each technology is also summarized in the Design 

Concept Definition tables in Appendix B. 
Evaluation 

PNM San Juan Generating Station P080828  Table 3-1 

Control Effectiveness for PM Control Technology Alternatives (Annual Average Emissions R

Unit SJGS 1 SJGS 2 SJGS 3 Design Basis Heat Input Data, MBtu/h 

3,707 3,688 5,758 

PM Emissions Cases lb/MBtu lb/h ton/yr lb/MBtu lb/h ton/yr lb/MBtu lb/h ton/yr lb/MPJFF (consent decree) 

0.015 55.6 207 0.015 55.3 207 0.015 86.4 321 0.0

WESP 0.010 37.1 138 0.010 36.9 137 0.010 57.6 214 0.0Notes: 1. Emissions levels (lb/MBtu) shown are on an annual average basis, front-half filterable PM only. 

2. Emissions (lb/h) calculations were based on the emissions level (lb/MBtu) and design basis heat input. 

3. Emissions levels listed were based on performance guarantees provided by the equipment vendor. 4. Yearly emissions (ton/yr) calculations were based on an annual unit capacity of 85 percent. 
Cost-Effectiveness 

PNM San Juan Generating Station of PM Control Technologies 

080828 4-1 

4.0 Cost-Effectiveness of PM Control Technologies 

This section discusses the cost-effectiveness for PM control technologies considered in 

this BART analysis. 

4.1 Cost-Effectiveness 

 The cost-effectiveness of each control technology was calculated from the cost of 

compliance and the amount of pollutant reduced. The cost-effectiveness is defined as the cost of 

control per amount of pollutant removed. The cost of control takes into account the impact 

analyses performed. The reduced emissions were estimated on a yearly basis according to the 

reduction from the consent decree emissions level shown in Table 3-1. Both the consent decree 

emissions level and the additional control technology alternative emissions level are documented 

in Table 3-1 and in the Design Concept Definition tables (Appendix B). 

 The cost-effectiveness values were based on 2007 dollars. 

4.2 Impact Analysis and Cost-Effectiveness Results 

An impact analysis was performed for all the identified technically feasible control 

technologies. A summary of the calculated impact analysis is presented in Appendix C. The 

impact analysis of WESP includes auxiliary energy to power the WESP and fans, and an 

estimate of the additional water consumption requirements when operating the WESP. Water is 

consumed when collector plate wash water is re-entrained into the flue gas flow, as well as waste 

water discharged from WESP through the blow down process to maintain the wash water 

chemical properties. The cost of this impact is significant due to the scarcity of water in the 

region where SJGS is located. 

For all the additional PM control technologies evaluated, a summary table was developed 

for the impact analysis performed and the resultant cost-effectiveness. Table 4-1 presents the 

final evaluations for all four units. The expected post-control emissions levels are also included 

in the table. 
PNM San Juan Generating Station of PM 080828 

Table 4-1 

Impact Analysis and Cost-Effectiveness Results of PM Control Technologies 

Total Total

Emission Expected Expected Expected Capital Annualized Incremental

Performance Emission Emission Emission Investment Cost Cost 

Level Rate Rate Reduction (TCI) (TAC) Effectiveness 

All Feasible Technologies (lb/MBtu) (lb/h) (ton/yr) (ton/yr) (1,000$) (1,000$) ($/ton) 

SJGS Unit 1

WESP (see note 8) 0.010 37.1 138 69 99,308 11,855 171,797 PJFF (see note 9) 0.015 55.6 207 -- 67,072 10,427 -- 

SJGS Unit 2

WESP (see note 8) 0.010 36.9 137 69 99,663 11,895 173,265 PJFF (see note 9) 0.015 55.3 206 -- 69,840 10,764 -- 

SJGS Unit 3

WESP (see note 8) 0.010 57.6 214 107 129,565 15,558 145,151 PJFF (see note 9) 0.015 86.4 322 -- 72,696 12,454 -- 

SJGS Unit 4

WESP (see note 8) 0.010 56.5 210 105 130,012 15,609 148,436 PJFF (see note 9) 0.015 84.7 315 -- 73,328 12,527 -- 

Notes:1. All costs are in 2007$.2. Expected emission rates (ton/yr) calculations were based on 85 percent unit capacity factor (referer to Appendix A Design Basis).3. Expected emission reduction (ton/yr) calculations were based on the consent decree upgrades control effectiveness as shown in Table 44. TCI and TAC are referenced from Appendix C Cost Analysis Summary.5. Cost-effectiveness ($/ton) is defined as ratio of TAC over Expected Emission Reduction (ton/yr).6. Expected emission reduction is based on annual emission reduction from consent decree upgrade emission levels (Table 4-1).7. Incremental cost effectiveness are based on increments in expected emission reduction (ton/yr).8. WESP scenario includes operating consent decee PJFF and existing wet FGD system.9. PJFF scenario includes operating existing wet FGD system.
Cost-Effectiveness 

PNM San Juan Generating Station of PM Control Technologies 

080828 4-3 

4.2.1 Cost-Effectiveness Comparison 

The Total Capital Investment (TCI) and Total Annualized Cost (TAC) for the 

consent decree PJFF at SJGS as shown in Table 4-1 are based on the values submitted in 

the June 6, 2007 BART application. The emission performance level of the consent 

decree PJFF at 0.015 lb/MBtu for front-half, filterable PM is the contract guarantee 

emission level for the on-going consent decree required environmental upgrade project at 

SJGS. This emission performance level is based on measuring PM emissions at the 

stack, which takes into account the impacts of operating the wet FGD system downstream 

of the newly-installed consent decree PJFF. The TCI for the consent decree PJFF ranges 

from $67 million to $73 million per SJGS unit. 

The WESP technology when operated downstream of the consent decree PJFF 

and existing wet FGD system will achieve an expected emission performance level of 

0.010 lb/MBtu for front-half, filterable PM. The corresponding TCI for the WESP ranges 

from $99 million to $130 million per SJGS unit. 

The increment cost effectiveness to improve PM emission level from the consent 

decree level of 0.015 lb/MBtu to 0.010 lb/MBtu utilizing the WESP technology in 

addition to operating the consent decree PJFF and wet FGD system ranges from $145 to 

$173 million per additional ton of PM. 
 

PNM San Juan Generating Station Visibility Impacts 

080828 5-1 

5.0 Visibility Impacts 

Visibility impact is the fifth step to consider in the engineering analysis required 

under the EPA BART guidelines. This step addresses the degree of improvement in 

visibility that may reasonably be anticipated to result from the use of the ‘‘best control 

technology’’ for sources subject to BART. Visibility impact analysis is achieved through 

a two phase process. First, the model was run using the pre-BART conditions to 

establish a baseline. For this analysis, the baseline consisted of the technologies and unit 

operations associated with the consent degree. Second, model runs were conducted for 

the WESP PM control technology identified for each unit during the BART engineering 

analysis. 

In the June 18, 2008 meeting between the Public Service Company of New 

Mexico (PNM), Black & Veatch (B&V), and the New Mexico Environment Department 

– Air Quality Bureau (NMED), the NMED requested additional analyses be performed 

for the particulate control technology that could meet a lower limit than 0.015 lb/MBtu. 

The objective of this modeling analysis is to evaluate visibility impacts for the WESP 

control technology selected using the first four steps of the BART analysis (as discussed 

in the previous sections) for PNM’s SJGS Units 1, 2, 3, and 4. The following sections 

discuss the modeling methodology in greater detail. 

 

5.1 Visibility Analysis 

Subsequent to the June 6, 2007 submittal, PNM further investigated additional 

refinements to the BART CALPUFF air dispersion modeling analyses which included 

nitrate repartitioning and more realistic ammonia background concentrations based on 

monitored values at several western Class I areas. These additional modeling options are 

considered more realistic and therefore will again form the basis of this analysis. 

To date, PNM has previously submitted four BART modeling analyses in addition 

to the additional Nalco Mobotec analyses being submitted separately but coincident with 

this analysis. To clarify the contents of these analyses, as well as for this submittal, a 

summary of each has been provided: 

June 6, 2007

Modeling analysis were performed to provide SJGS plant-wide regional haze 

(visibility) impacts at 16 Class I areas. The analyses were based on a constant 1 ppb 

background ammonia concentration and no nitrate repartitioning. The NOx control 

technologies analyzed were the Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) and SNCR/SCR 

Hybrid. 
 

PNM San Juan Generating Station Visibility Impacts 

080828 5-2 

November 6, 2007

Modeling analysis were performed to provide SJGS plant-wide regional haze 

(visibility) impacts at 16 Class I areas. The analysis was based on refinements which 

included using the nitrate repartitioning methodology and monthly variable 

background ammonia concentrations. Again, the NOx control technologies analyzed 

were the SCR and SNCR/SCR Hybrid. 

March 31, 2008

Two main modeling analyses were performed to provide SJGS plant-wide and unit 

specific regional haze (visibility) impacts at 16 Class I areas for the SCR NOx control 

technology only. One of the analyses, believed to be the more representative of 

ammonia chemistry of the area, was based on the November 6, 2007 refinements 

which included using the nitrate repartitioning methodology and monthly variable 

background ammonia concentrations. The other analyses included nitrate 

repartitioning and a constant background ammonia concentration as requested by the 

NMED. 

May 30, 2008

Two modeling analyses were performed to provide SJGS plant-wide and unit specific 

regional haze (visibility) impacts at 16 Class I areas for the SNCR NOx control 

technology only. Similar to the March 31, 2008 analyses, one of the analyses was 

based on the November 6, 2007 refinements which included using the nitrate 

repartitioning methodology and monthly variable background ammonia 

concentrations. The other analyses included nitrate repartitioning and a constant 

background ammonia concentration. It should be noted that all vendors of SNCR 

(including Fuel Tech and Nalco Mobotec) have been modeled together as one 

technology called SNCR. This is the same approach that is used for modeling SCR 

control technology, where all vendors are modeled generically as SCR. 

August 29, 2008

Four modeling analyses were performed to provide SJGS plant-wide and unit specific 

regional haze (visibility) impacts at 16 Class I areas for the ROFA with Rotamix, 

Rotamix, and ROFA NOx and WESP PM control technologies (the NOx and PM 

analyses were submitted separately. Similar to the May 30, 2008 analyses, these 

analyses were also based on the November 6, 2007 refinements which included using 
 

PNM San Juan Generating Station Visibility Impacts 

080828 5-3 

the nitrate repartitioning methodology and monthly variable background ammonia 

concentrations. 

The modeling refinements contained in this submittal using nitrate repartitioning 

and the variable ammonia background as well as the previous November 2007, March 

2008, and May 30, 2008 submittals supersedes the original June 2007 BART modeling 

analyses as PNM believes these analyses are more representative of regional conditions 

in the modeling domain, as well as, allow for a more representative visibility analysis. 

Information pertinent to these two refinements has been included in detail in the previous 

four submittals. Furthermore, at the June 18, 2008 meeting NMED indicated that based 

on a current ammonia monitoring study conducted by Mark E. Sather of EPA Region VI, 

the previous analyses provided utilizing the variable ammonia were representative of the 

surrounding background. Therefore, no other analyses were performed using nitrate 

repartitioning and constant background ammonia. 

5.2 Visibility Summary

 Based on the refinements methodology consisting of representative background 

ammonia concentrations and nitrate repartitioning, CALPUFF visibility modeling was 

performed for three cases; pre-consent decree, consent decree (which represents SJGS’s 

BART baseline scenario), and WESP PM control technology scenarios. The modeling 

summarized in this report is for the SJGS on a plant-wide basis and for each of the four 

SJGS units on an individual unit basis. It is important to note that all other modeling 

options as described in the BART application were unchanged. For simplicity, the 

following results discuss the differences between the consent decree scenario and the 

WESP control technology scenarios. Additionally, the updated NPS particulate 

speciation is contained in Appendix D, the stack outlet conditions are contained in 

Appendix E, and the visibility modeling results are contained in Appendix F. 

5.2.1 SJGS Facility Visibility Summary with Nitrate Repartitioning and Variable 

Ammonia 

The results of the refined visibility modeling for the SJGS plant, assuming the 

same control technology is installed on all four units, are illustrated in Tables 1 through 4 

of Appendix F. These tables summarize the scenarios and the maximum visibility 

(deciview) impact seen at any of the 16 Class I areas at any time over the 2001 to 2003 

period. The results of this analysis, using the aforementioned refinements, indicates a 

minimal improvement in visibility impact (less than 0.5 dv) at each of the 16 Class I 
 

PNM San Juan Generating Station Visibility Impacts 

080828 5-4 

areas when compared to the baseline (consent decree) scenario, with the exception of 

Mesa Verde, which shows a visibility improvement of 0.62 dv.

 The maximum visibility (deciview) improvement seen at any of the 16 Class I 

areas at any time over the 2001 to 2003 period is illustrated in Table 4 for each scenario. 

The expected degree of visibility improvement for each control scenario for each unit (on 

a plant-wide basis) was determined by the difference in the maximum visibility 

improvement for each receptor at each of the sixteen Class I areas. Again, it is important 

to note that the control technology associated with the consent decree formulated the 

SJGS’s baseline case, as well as the baseline case for the individual unit analyses 

described later. Additionally, the cost-effectiveness for the potential BART control 

technologies from the BART application were used to calculate visibility improvement 

cost-effectiveness in $/deciview ($/dv). Three major scenarios are shown in the 

visibility improvement cost effectiveness summary in Table 4 for each control 

technology: 

• Pre-consent decree to consent decree. 

• Consent decree to additional WESP control technology alternative scenario. 

• Pre-consent decree to additional WESP control technology alternative scenario. 

These maximum visibility improvements between the consent decree and the 

WESP control technology scenario range from 0.02 dv to 0.62 dv of expected visibility 

improvement above the consent decree scenario. 

The results indicate that adding additional WESP control technology beyond the 

consent decree does yield visibility improvement greater than 0.5 dv at the Mesa Verde 

Class I area. However, this visibility improvement is an isolated incident as no other 

Class I area’s visibility improvement is greater than 0.5 dv. The next highest visibility 

improvement is 0.14 dv. 

Based on the visibility improvement modeled and the total annual cost evaluated 

in the impact analysis stage of the BART application document, the cost-effectiveness for 

visibility improvement (annual cost per improvement in visibility, $/dv), was determined 

for SJGS over the aforementioned range of visibility improvement. The resulting cost for 

installation of WESP control technology for all four units ranges from $2,496 million/dv 

to $89 million/dv. 

Appendix F contains a SJGS plant-wide summary of the 98th percentile visibility 

impact for the WESP modeled technology scenarios (i.e., Pre-Consent Decree, Consent 

Decree, and WESP scenario), provides information on the number of days above 0.5 dv 
 

PNM San Juan Generating Station Visibility Impacts 

080828 5-5 

threshold for specific scenarios, and indicates the contribution of each 

pollutant associated with the 98th percentile visibility impact for each class I area. 

5.2.2 Unit Specific Visibility Summary with Nitrate Repartitioning and Variable 

Ammonia 

The results of the refined visibility modeling for Unit 1, Unit 2, Unit 3, and Unit 4 

are illustrated in Tables 5-8, 9-12, 13-16, and 17-20 of Appendix F, respectively. These 

tables summarize the scenarios and the maximum visibility (deciview) impact seen at any 

of the 16 Class I areas at any time over the 2001 to 2003 period. Similar to results seen 

for the SJGS facility, the visibility impacts at Mesa Verde represent the maximum 

visibility impact at any of the 16 Class I areas. In addition, this analysis indicates a 

minimal improvement in visibility impact (less than 0.5 dv) at each of the 16 Class I 

areas when compared to the baseline (consent decree) scenario. 

The maximum visibility (deciview) improvement seen at any of the 16 Class I 

areas at any time over the 2001 to 2003 period is illustrated in Tables 8, 12, 16, and 20. 

Again, the expected degree of visibility improvement for each control scenario for each 

unit was determined by the difference between the consent decree’s maximum visibility 

improvement for each receptor at each of the sixteen Class I areas and the specific WESP 

control technology scenario’s maximum visibility improvement for each receptor at each 

of the sixteen Class areas. Furthermore, the same methodology previously described for 

the SJGS’s cost-effectiveness in ($/dv) was used here for each unit. 

These maximum visibility improvements between the consent decree and the 

WESP control scenario for each unit are similar to that of the combined SJGS. The 

visibility improvements for each scenario are summarized below. 

WESP

• Unit 1 improvements range from less than 0.01 dv to 0.07 dv 

• Unit 2 improvements range from less than 0.01 dv to 0.07 dv 

• Unit 3 improvements range from less than 0.01 dv to 0.21 dv 

• Unit 4 improvements range from less than 0.01 dv to 0.21 dv 

The results again indicate that adding additional PM control technology beyond 

the consent decree consisting of WESPs does not yield visibility improvement greater 

than 0.5 dv at any Class I area. Based on the visibility improvement modeled and the 

total annual cost evaluated in the impact analysis stage of the BART application 

document, the cost-effectiveness for visibility improvement (annual cost per 

improvement in visibility, $/dv), was determined for each unit for each Class I area. The 
 

PNM San Juan Generating Station Visibility Impacts 

080828 5-6 

resulting cost for installation of additional control technology for each unit is summarized 

below. 

WESP

• Unit 1 cost range is $2,964 million/dv to $174 million/dv. 

• Unit 2 cost range is $2,974 million/dv to $172 million/dv. 

• Unit 3 cost range is $2,222 million/dv to $76 million/dv. 

• Unit 4 cost range is $3,902 million/dv to $75 million/dv. 

Appendix F also includes a unit specific summary of the 98th percentile visibility 

impact for the three modeled technology scenarios (i.e., Pre-Consent Decree, Consent 

Decree, WESP scenarios), includes the number of days above 0.5 dv threshold for 

specific scenarios, and indicates the contribution of each pollutant associated with 

the 98th percentile visibility impact for each class I area. 
 

PNM San Juan Generating Station Conclusion 

080828 6-1 

6.0 Conclusion 

As noted in this document, PNM’s further investigation of additional refinements 

to the June 2007 BART CALPUFF air dispersion modeling analyses to yield more 

realistic regional haze impacts was warranted. These analyses included nitrate 

repartitioning and more realistic ammonia background concentrations based on 

monitored values at several western Class I areas, as well as, the additional ammonia 

study being conducted by EPA in New Mexico. The conclusion of this study re-iterates 

and further supports the overall findings of the original June 2007, as well as, the three 

aforementioned additional submittals, that installation of additional WESP PM control 

technology systems at the SJGS provide minimal visibility improvements and would 

require significant capital expenditure and modifications that will impact many areas of 

the plant including boiler draft systems and ash handling. The results from the analyses 

further substantiate that the addition of WESP PM control technology does not yield a 

benefit nor meet the intended goal of BART. Specifically, these analyses indicate: 

• The addition of WESP PM control technology on a plant-wide or individual unit 

basis shows less than a 0.5 dv improvement for all Class I areas including the four 

Class I areas located in New Mexico. (Plant wide showed a 0.62 dv improvement 

at Mesa Verde.) 

• The minimal visibility improvements discussed in this document do not merit the 

large capital expenditure required to install WESP PM control technology. Both 

the total annual costs evaluated and the cost-effectiveness ($/dv) are extremely 

prohibitive given the minimal improvements realized. 

Therefore, as previously noted, given the minimal visibility improvement to the 

class I areas in the BART analysis, the recommended PM BART control for SJGS is the 

PJFF. 
PNM San Juan Generating Station Appendix A 

080828 A-1 

Appendix A 

(Previously Submitted in June 6, 2007 BART Analysis) 
PNM San Juan Generating Station Appendix B 

080828 B-1 

Appendix B 

Design Concept Definitions 
PNM San Juan Generating Station Appendix B 

080828 B-2 

Design Concept Definition 

Site Name San Juan Generating Station Units 1, 2, 3, 4 

Client Name PNM Process Technology Pulse Jet Fabric Filter (PJFF) 

Process Description PJFF for particulate matter removal upstream of Wet FGD system. This is the process technology applied to meet Consent Decree 

requirements. 

Pollutant PM (Unit 1) PM (Unit 2) PM (Unit 3) PM (Unit 4) 

 Inlet Emissions 

 lb/MBtu 17.6 17.6 17.6 17.6 

 lb/h 65,144 64,810 101,187 99,271 

 Controlled Emissions 

 lb/MBtu 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 

 lb/h 55.6 55.3 86.4 84.7 

Inlet Flow Basis, acfm 1,571,717 1,563,662 2,441,313 2,395,099 

Pressure Drop Added, in. wg NA 

Coal Source and Type New Mexico, Subbituminous 

 Capacity Factor 85.0% 

Consumables Reagent None. 

 Energy (kW) 4,488 4,488 6,895 6,895 

Maintenance 3% of direct material cost. 

Byproduct Description None. 

 Other None. 

Location of Major Process Equipment PJFF casing located in back-end of plant. Refer to Consent Decree environmental upgrade 

project plant arrangement. 

Inlet/Outlet Connections and Interconnecting Ducts Inlet ductwork connection downstream of de-energize hot-side ESP and outlet ductwork 

connection upstream of modified ID fan inlet. 

Reagent Storage None. 

Control System Modifications PJFF control system tie into plant control system. 

Fan Modifications ID fan modifications. 

Power Supply/Aux Power Modifications Minor aux electric system modification required for PJFF and ID fans. 

Enclosures Requirements Enclosures included with PJFF casing required. 

Demolition or Relocation Requirements Demolition of ductwork for retrofit, demolition and relocation of existing site 

structures/equipment to locate PJFF casing and ductwork routing. 

Major Constructability Issues Accessibility to the back-end area of the plant. 

Significant Issues or Challenges None. 

Other Assumptions 

• No major impact on plant availability. 

• The site has sufficient area available to accommodate construction activities including, but not limited to, offices, laydown, and staging.

• Retrofit project is completed/in progress as part of the Consent Decree environmental upgrade project.

State of Availability Available. 

State of Applicability Applicable. 

Technical Feasibility Currently installed or under construction. 
PNM San Juan Generating Station Appendix B 

080828 B-3 

 Design Concept Definition 

Site Name San Juan Generating Station Units 1, 2, 3, 4 

Client Name PNM Process Technology Wet Electrostatic Precipitator (WESP) 

Process Description Install a WESP downstream of Wet FGD for additional particulate matter collection. 

Pollutant PM (Unit 1) PM (Unit 2) PM (Unit 3) PM (Unit 4) 

 Inlet Emissions 

 lb/MBtu 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 

 lb/h 55.6 55.3 86.4 84.7 

 Controlled Emissions 

 lb/MBtu 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 

 lb/h 37.1 36.9 57.6 56.5 

Inlet Flow Basis, acfm 1,323,494 1,316,710 2,055,753 2,016,837 

Pressure Drop Added, in. wg NA 

Coal Source and Type New Mexico, Subbituminous 

 Capacity Factor 85.0% 

Consumables Make-up Water (gpm) 100 100 100 100 

 Energy (kW) 1,112 1,112 1,728 1,728 

Maintenance 3% of direct material cost. 

Byproduct Description None. 

 Other None. 

Location of Major Process Equipment Conceptual layout of WESP at the back-end of plant, in the same general location as consent

decree PJFF. 

Inlet/Outlet Connections and Interconnecting Ducts Inlet ductwork connection downstream of Wet FGD and outlet ductwork connection into stack 

breeching. 

Reagent Storage None. 

Control System Modifications New stand-alone control system, tie in to plant DCS control system. 

Fan Modifications FGD booster fan modifications required to overcome additional pressure drop. 

Power Supply/Aux Power Modifications Aux electric system modification required for WESP electrical systems and FGD booster fan 

modifications. 

Enclosures Requirements Enclosures included with WESP casing required. 

Demolition or Relocation Requirements Demolition of ductwork for retrofit, demolition and relocation of existing site 

structures/equipment to locate WESP casing and ductwork routing. 

Major Constructability Issues Accessibility to the back-end area of the plant. 

Significant Issues or Challenges None. 

Other Assumptions 

• No major impact in plant availability. 

• The site has sufficient area available to accommodate construction activities including, but not limited to, offices, laydown, and staging.

• Demolition and relocation of existing site structures/equipment are based on a conceptual layout approach. 

State of Availability Available. 

State of Applicability Applicable. 

Technical Feasibility Technically feasible. 
PNM San Juan Generating Station Appendix C 

080828 C-4 

Appendix C 

Cost Analysis Summary 
PNM San Juan Generating Station Appendix C 

080828 C-5 

Technology: Pulse Jet Fabric Filter - SJGS Unit 1 Date: 4/25/2007

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

PJFF system scope $9,020,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Ductwork $812,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Ash handling system scope $1,155,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Booster fan modifications $3,434,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Balance of plant modifications $3,938,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $18,359,000

Gross Receipt Tax $2,855,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $21,214,000

Direct installation costs

PJFF construction cost $7,543,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Ductwork construction cost $10,958,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Ash handling construction cost $475,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Booster fan construction cost $1,283,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Balance of plant construction cost $8,099,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $28,358,000

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $49,572,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $2,304,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Owner's cost $1,479,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Construction management $4,957,000 (DC) X 10.0%

Start-up and spare parts $744,000 (DC) X 1.5%

Performance test $100,000 Engineering estimate

Contingencies $3,289,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Total indirect costs (IC) $12,873,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $4,627,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 2 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $67,072,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Maintenance labor and materials $1,487,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $1,487,000

Variable annual costs

Bag replacement cost $296,000 2,957 bags and 100 $/bag B&W bag offerings, 3 yr replacements

Cage replacement cost $74,000 1,478 cages and 50 $/cage B&W cage offerings, 6 yr replacements

ID fan power $1,828,000 4,028 kW and 0.06095 $/kWh B&W guarantees, 15 in. H2O d.p.

Auxiliary power $209,000 460 kW and 0.06095 $/kWh Engineering estimate

Total variable annual costs $2,407,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $3,894,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $6,533,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $6,533,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $10,427,000
PNM San Juan Generating Station Appendix C 

080828 C-6 

Technology: Pulse Jet Fabric Filter - SJGS Unit 2 Date: 4/25/2007

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

PJFF system scope $8,658,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Ductwork $904,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Ash handling system scope $1,155,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Booster fan modifications $3,434,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Balance of plant modifications $4,072,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $18,223,000

Gross Receipt Tax $2,977,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $21,200,000

Direct installation costs

PJFF construction cost $7,412,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Ductwork construction cost $13,335,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Ash handling construction cost $472,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Booster fan construction cost $1,283,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Balance of plant construction cost $8,139,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $30,641,000

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $51,841,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $2,238,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Owner's cost $1,541,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Construction management $5,184,000 (DC) X 10.0%

Start-up and spare parts $778,000 (DC) X 1.5%

Performance test $100,000 Engineering estimate

Contingencies $3,340,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Total indirect costs (IC) $13,181,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $4,818,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 2 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $69,840,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Maintenance labor and materials $1,555,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $1,555,000

Variable annual costs

Bag replacement cost $296,000 2,957 bags and 100 $/bag B&W bag offerings, 3 yr replacements

Cage replacement cost $74,000 1,478 cages and 50 $/cage B&W cage offerings, 6 yr replacements

ID fan power $1,828,000 4,028 kW and 0.06095 $/kWh B&W guarantees, 15 in. H2O d.p.

Auxiliary power $209,000 460 kW and 0.06095 $/kWh Engineering estimate

Total variable annual costs $2,407,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $3,962,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $6,802,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $6,802,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $10,764,000
PNM San Juan Generating Station Appendix C 

080828 C-7 

Technology: Pulse Jet Fabric Filter - SJGS Unit 3 Date: 4/25/2007

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

PJFF system scope $10,901,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Ductwork $1,364,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Ash handling system scope $977,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Booster fan modifications $2,871,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Balance of plant modifications $4,733,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $20,846,000

Gross Receipt Tax $3,183,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $24,029,000

Direct installation costs

PJFF construction cost $11,089,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Ductwork construction cost $9,007,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Ash handling construction cost $706,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Booster fan construction cost $1,403,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Balance of plant construction cost $9,286,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $31,491,000

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $55,520,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $2,535,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Owner's cost $1,655,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Construction management $5,552,000 (DC) X 10.0%

Start-up and spare parts $833,000 (DC) X 1.5%

Performance test $100,000 Engineering estimate

Contingencies $1,486,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Total indirect costs (IC) $12,161,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $5,015,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 2 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $72,696,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Maintenance labor and materials $1,666,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $1,666,000

Variable annual costs

Bag replacement cost $462,000 4,620 bags and 100 $/bag B&W bag offerings, 3 yr replacements

Cage replacement cost $116,000 2,310 cages and 50 $/cage B&W cage offerings, 6 yr replacements

ID fan power $2,856,000 6,294 kW and 0.06095 $/kWh B&W guarantees, 15 in. H2O d.p.

Auxiliary power $273,000 601 kW and 0.06095 $/kWh Engineering estimate

Total variable annual costs $3,707,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $5,373,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $7,081,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $7,081,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $12,454,000
PNM San Juan Generating Station Appendix C 

080828 C-8 

Technology: Pulse Jet Fabric Filter - SJGS Unit 4 Date: 4/25/2007

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

PJFF system scope $12,572,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Ductwork $1,479,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Ash handling system scope $932,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Booster fan modifications $2,870,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Balance of plant modifications $5,040,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $22,893,000

Gross Receipt Tax $3,212,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $26,105,000

Direct installation costs

PJFF construction cost $10,937,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Ductwork construction cost $7,946,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Ash handling construction cost $685,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Booster fan construction cost $1,406,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Balance of plant construction cost $8,856,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $29,830,000

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $55,935,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $2,645,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Owner's cost $1,670,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Construction management $5,594,000 (DC) X 10.0%

Start-up and spare parts $839,000 (DC) X 1.5%

Performance test $100,000 Engineering estimate

Contingencies $1,486,000 PNM environmental upgrade cost

Total indirect costs (IC) $12,334,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $5,059,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 2 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $73,328,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Maintenance labor and materials $1,678,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $1,678,000

Variable annual costs

Bag replacement cost $462,000 4,620 bags and 100 $/bag B&W bag offerings, 3 yr replacements

Cage replacement cost $116,000 2,310 cages and 50 $/cage B&W cage offerings, 6 yr replacements

ID fan power $2,856,000 6,294 kW and 0.06095 $/kWh B&W guarantees, 15 in. H2O d.p.

Auxiliary power $273,000 601 kW and 0.06095 $/kWh Engineering estimate

Total variable annual costs $3,707,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $5,385,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $7,142,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $7,142,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $12,527,000
PNM San Juan Generating Station Appendix C 

080828 C-9 

Technology: Wet ESP - Unit 1 Date: 7/24/2008

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

WESP system includes casing, electrical sys., $19,289,000 from B&V reference cost database

penthouse blower & heater, access provisions

Ductwork $812,000 from B&V reference cost database

Booster fans $2,400,000 from B&V reference cost database

Electrical system upgrades $2,318,000 New transformer and electrical upgrades

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $24,819,000

Instrumentation and controls $1,539,000 (CC) X 6.2%

Freight $1,241,000 (CC) X 5.0%

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $27,599,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $8,280,000 (PEC) X 30.0%

Handling & erection $8,280,000 (PEC) X 30.0%

Electrical $4,140,000 (PEC) X 15.0%

Piping $828,000 (PEC) X 3.0%

Insulation $552,000 (PEC) X 2.0%

Painting $276,000 (PEC) X 1.0%

Demolition $8,280,000 (PEC) X 30.00%

Relocation $2,760,000 (PEC) X 10.00%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $33,396,000

Site preparation $1,000,000 Engineering estimate

Buildings $0 N/A

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $61,995,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $4,340,000 (DC) X 7.0%

Owner's cost $3,100,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Construction management $6,200,000 (DC) X 10.0%

Start-up and spare parts $1,240,000 (DC) X 2.0%

Performance test $100,000 Engineering estimate

Contingencies $12,399,000 (DC) X 20.0%

Total indirect costs (IC) $27,379,000

Allowance for Funds Used During Construction (AFDC) $9,934,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 3 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (AFDC) $99,308,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Maintenance materials and labor $1,860,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Operating labor $100,000 1 FTE and 100000 $/year Estimated level

Total fixed annual costs $1,960,000

Variable annual costs

Auxiliary power $113,000 248 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Estimated level

ID fan power $392,000 864 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Estimated level

Service water $15,000 100 gpm and 0.33 $/kgal Estimated level

Total variable annual costs $520,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $2,480,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $9,375,000 (TCI) X 9.44% CRF at 7% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $9,375,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $11,855,000
PNM San Juan Generating Station Appendix C 

080828 C-10 

Technology: Wet ESP - Unit 2 Date: 7/24/2008

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

WESP system includes casing, electrical sys., $19,289,000 from B&V reference cost database

penthouse blower & heater, access provisions

Ductwork $904,000 from B&V reference cost database

Booster fans $2,400,000 from B&V reference cost database

Electrical system upgrades $2,318,000 New transformer and electrical upgrades

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $24,911,000

Instrumentation and controls $1,544,000 (CC) X 6.2%

Freight $1,246,000 (CC) X 5.0%

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $27,701,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $8,310,000 (PEC) X 30.0%

Handling & erection $8,310,000 (PEC) X 30.0%

Electrical $4,155,000 (PEC) X 15.0%

Piping $831,000 (PEC) X 3.0%

Insulation $554,000 (PEC) X 2.0%

Painting $277,000 (PEC) X 1.0%

Demolition $8,310,000 (PEC) X 30.00%

Relocation $2,770,000 (PEC) X 10.00%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $33,517,000

Site preparation $1,000,000 Engineering estimate

Buildings $0 N/A

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $62,218,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $4,355,000 (DC) X 7.0%

Owner's cost $3,111,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Construction management $6,222,000 (DC) X 10.0%

Start-up and spare parts $1,244,000 (DC) X 2.0%

Performance test $100,000 Engineering estimate

Contingencies $12,444,000 (DC) X 20.0%

Total indirect costs (IC) $27,476,000

Allowance for Funds Used During Construction (AFDC) $9,969,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 3 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (AFDC) $99,663,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Maintenance materials and labor $1,867,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Operating labor $100,000 1 FTE and 100000 $/year Estimated level

Total fixed annual costs $1,967,000

Variable annual costs

Auxiliary power $113,000 248 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Estimated level

ID fan power $392,000 864 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Estimated level

Service water $15,000 100 gpm and 0.33 $/kgal Estimated level

Total variable annual costs $520,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $2,487,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $9,408,000 (TCI) X 9.44% CRF at 7% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $9,408,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $11,895,000
PNM San Juan Generating Station Appendix C 

080828 C-11 

Technology: Wet ESP - Unit 3 Date: 7/24/2008

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

WESP system includes casing, electrical sys., $25,123,000 from B&V reference cost database

penthouse blower & heater, access provisions

Ductwork $1,364,000 from B&V reference cost database

Booster fans $3,600,000 from B&V reference cost database

Electrical system upgrades $2,427,000 New transformer and electrical upgrades

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $32,514,000

Instrumentation and controls $2,016,000 (CC) X 6.2%

Freight $1,626,000 (CC) X 5.0%

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $36,156,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $10,847,000 (PEC) X 30.0%

Handling & erection $10,847,000 (PEC) X 30.0%

Electrical $5,423,000 (PEC) X 15.0%

Piping $1,085,000 (PEC) X 3.0%

Insulation $723,000 (PEC) X 2.0%

Painting $362,000 (PEC) X 1.0%

Demolition $10,847,000 (PEC) X 30.00%

Relocation $3,616,000 (PEC) X 10.00%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $43,750,000

Site preparation $1,000,000 Engineering estimate

Buildings $0 N/A

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $80,906,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $5,663,000 (DC) X 7.0%

Owner's cost $4,045,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Construction management $8,091,000 (DC) X 10.0%

Start-up and spare parts $1,618,000 (DC) X 2.0%

Performance test $100,000 Engineering estimate

Contingencies $16,181,000 (DC) X 20.0%

Total indirect costs (IC) $35,698,000

Allowance for Funds Used During Construction (AFDC) $12,961,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 3 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (AFDC) $129,565,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Maintenance materials and labor $2,427,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Operating labor $100,000 1 FTE and 100000 $/year Estimated level

Total fixed annual costs $2,527,000

Variable annual costs

Auxiliary power $175,000 386 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Estimated level

ID fan power $610,000 1,342 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Estimated level

Service water $15,000 100 gpm and 0.33 $/kgal Estimated level

Total variable annual costs $800,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $3,327,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $12,231,000 (TCI) X 9.44% CRF at 7% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $12,231,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $15,558,000
PNM San Juan Generating Station Appendix C 

080828 C-12 

Technology: Wet ESP - Unit 4 Date: 7/24/2008

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

WESP system includes casing, electrical sys., $25,123,000 from B&V reference cost database

penthouse blower & heater, access provisions

Ductwork $1,479,000 from B&V reference cost database

Booster fans $3,600,000 from B&V reference cost database

Electrical system upgrades $2,427,000 New transformer and electrical upgrades

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $32,629,000

Instrumentation and controls $2,023,000 (CC) X 6.2%

Freight $1,631,000 (CC) X 5.0%

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $36,283,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $10,885,000 (PEC) X 30.0%

Handling & erection $10,885,000 (PEC) X 30.0%

Electrical $5,442,000 (PEC) X 15.0%

Piping $1,088,000 (PEC) X 3.0%

Insulation $726,000 (PEC) X 2.0%

Painting $363,000 (PEC) X 1.0%

Demolition $10,885,000 (PEC) X 30.00%

Relocation $3,628,000 (PEC) X 10.00%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $43,902,000

Site preparation $1,000,000 Engineering estimate

Buildings $0 N/A

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $81,185,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $5,683,000 (DC) X 7.0%

Owner's cost $4,059,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Construction management $8,119,000 (DC) X 10.0%

Start-up and spare parts $1,624,000 (DC) X 2.0%

Performance test $100,000 Engineering estimate

Contingencies $16,237,000 (DC) X 20.0%

Total indirect costs (IC) $35,822,000

Allowance for Funds Used During Construction (AFDC) $13,005,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 3 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (AFDC) $130,012,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Maintenance materials and labor $2,436,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Operating labor $100,000 1 FTE and 100000 $/year Estimated level

Total fixed annual costs $2,536,000

Variable annual costs

Auxiliary power $175,000 386 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Estimated level

ID fan power $610,000 1,342 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Estimated level

Service water $15,000 100 gpm and 0.33 $/kgal Estimated level

Total variable annual costs $800,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $3,336,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $12,273,000 (TCI) X 9.44% CRF at 7% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $12,273,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $15,609,000
PNM San Juan Generating Station Appendix D 

080828 D-1 

Appendix D 

NPS Particulate Speciation for the WESP
Unit 1 Baseline (Consent Decree)

Controlled PM10 Speciation from AP-42 Tables 1.1-5 & 1.1-6Dry Bottom Boiler burning Pulverized Coal using FGD+FF for Emissions controlassumes heating value of 9,692 Btu/lb and a sulfur content of 0.77 % and an ash content of 21.29 % and a heat input 3,707 mmBtu/hr and f(RH) = 

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold values from Table 1.1-5.)

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) (lb/ton) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Type Ext.Coef. (lb/mmBtu) 

PC-DB 0.0420 0.0220 0.0110 0.6 0.0110 0.0106 1 0.00041 10 0.020 0.016 SO4 3*f(RH) 0.004 

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold Values from Table 1.1-6.)

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (lb/ton) (lb/ton) (lb/ton) Coef. (lb/ton) (lb/ton) Coef. (lb/ton) Coef. (lb/ton) (lb/ton) Type Ext.Coef. (lb/ton) 

PC-DB 0.813 0.426 0.213 0.6 0.213 0.205 1 0.0079 10 0.388 0.310 SO4 3*f(RH) 0.078 

Controlled PM10 Emissions

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (% of Total) (% of Total) (% of Total) Coef. (% of Total) (% of Total) Coef. (% of Total) Coef. (% of Total) (% of Total) Type Ext.Coef. (% of Total) 

PC-DB 100% 52.3% 26.2% 0.6 26.2% 25.2% 1 1.0% 10 47.7% 38.1% SO4 3*f(RH) 9.5% 

If you are given Total PM10 emissions in lb/hr:

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold Value is Input by user.)

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (lb/hr) (lb/hr) (lb/hr) Coef. (lb/hr) (lb/hr) Coef. (lb/hr) Coef. (lb/hr) (lb/hr) Type Ext.Coef. (lb/hr) 

PC-DB 70.8 37.1 18.5 0.6 18.5 17.8 1 0.7 10 33.8 27.0 SO4 3 6.8 

Weighted Extinction 11.1 17.8 6.9 81.0 

If you are given Total PM10 emissions in lb/mmBtu:

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold Value is Input by user.)

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Type Ext.Coef. (lb/mmBtu) 

PC-DB 0.02 0.010 0.01 0.6 0.01 0.00 1 0.0002 10 0.01 0.01 SO4 3 0.00 

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold values from Table 1.1-5 and from Table 6 of EPA’s January 2002 DRAFT “Catalog of Global Emissions Inventories and Emission Inventory Tools for Blac

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (% of Total) (% of Total) (% of Filterable) Coef. (% of Filterable) (% of Filterable) 1 (% of Filterable) Coef. (% of Total) (% of Condensible) Type Ext.Coef. (% of Condensib

PC-DB 100% 52.3% 50.0% 0.6 50.0% 48.2% 1 1.9% 10 47.7% 80.0% SO4 3 20.0% 

(% of Fine) Coef. (% of Fine) Coef.

96.3% 1 3.7% 10

If you are given Filterable PM10 emissions in lb/hr:

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold Value is Input by user.)

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (lb/hr) (lb/hr) (lb/hr) Coef. (lb/hr) (lb/hr) Coef. (lb/hr) Coef. (lb/hr) (lb/hr) Type Ext.Coef. (lb/hr) 

PC-DB 70.8 37.1 18.5 0.6 18.5 17.8 1 0.7 10 33.8 27.0 SO4 3 6.8 

If you are given Filterable PM10 emissions in lb/mmBtu:

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold Value is Input by user.)

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Type Ext.Coef. (lb/mmBtu) 

PC-DB 0.02 0.010 0.01 0.6 0.01 0.00 1 0.0002 10 0.01 0.01 SO4 3 0.00 

Coarse 26.2% Coarse 18.5Fine Soil 25.2% Fine Soil 17.8Fine EC 1.0% Fine EC 0.7CPM IOR 38.1% CPM IOR 27.0CPM OR 9.5% CPM OR 6.8

100.0% 70.8

Unit 1
Unit 1

Dry-Bottom PC Boiler w FGD + FF PM10 Speciation Profile

26.2%

25.2%

1.0%

38.1%

9.5%
Unit 1

Dry-Bottom PC Boiler w FGD + FF PM10 Emissions (lb/hr)

18.5

17.8

0.7

27.0

6.8
PC with FGD + Fabric Filter

from AP-42 Table 1.1-6(User inputs filterable emission rate in lb/hr)

Particle Cumulative Mass Fraction of PM10 Particle Emissions

Size < Stated Size < Stated Size Size Range by size

(um) FF (%) (um) (lb/hr)

10 92% 100% 10-6 6.0

6 77% 84% 6-2.5 9.7

2.5 53% 58% 2.5-1.25 8.9

1.25 31% 34% 1.25-1.0 2.4

1 25% 27% 1.0-625 4.4

0.625 14% 15% 0.625-0 5.6

CALPUFF Filterable Filterable

Particle Particle Size Fraction Emissions Extinction Emissions

Size (um) Range (um) (% of Total) (lb/hr) Coef. (g/sec)

8 10-6 16% 6.0 0.6 0.76

4.25 6-2.5 26% 9.7 0.6 1.22 42% Coarse >/1.88 2.5-1.25 24% 8.9 1 1.12 58% Fine Soil <1.25 1.25-1 7% 2.4 1 0.30

0.813 1.6-25 12% 4.4 1 0.56

0.625 0.625-0 15% 5.6 1 0.62

10 0.09 3.7% of Fine is 

Totals 100% 37.1 4.67

Unit 1
Unit 1

Dry-Bottom PC Boiler w FGD + FF Fraction of Filterable PM

16%

26%

24%

7%

12%

15%
Unit 1

Dry-Bottom PC Boiler w FGD + FF Filterable PM10 Emissions (lb/hr) in Each Size R

6.0

9.7

8.9

2.4

4.4

5.6
Unit 2 Baseline (Consent Decree)

Controlled PM10 Speciation from AP-42 Tables 1.1-5 & 1.1-6Dry Bottom Boiler burning Pulverized Coal using FGD+FF for Emissions controlassumes heating value of 9,692 Btu/lb and a sulfur content of 0.77 % and an ash content of 21.29 % and a heat input 3,688 mmBtu/hr and f(RH) = 

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold values from Table 1.1-5.)

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) (lb/ton) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Type Ext.Coef. (lb/mmBtu) 

PC-DB 0.0420 0.0220 0.0110 0.6 0.0110 0.0106 1 0.00041 10 0.020 0.016 SO4 3*f(RH) 0.004 

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold Values from Table 1.1-6.)

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (lb/ton) (lb/ton) (lb/ton) Coef. (lb/ton) (lb/ton) Coef. (lb/ton) Coef. (lb/ton) (lb/ton) Type Ext.Coef. (lb/ton) 

PC-DB 0.813 0.426 0.213 0.6 0.213 0.205 1 0.0079 10 0.388 0.310 SO4 3*f(RH) 0.078 

Controlled PM10 Emissions

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (% of Total) (% of Total) (% of Total) Coef. (% of Total) (% of Total) Coef. (% of Total) Coef. (% of Total) (% of Total) Type Ext.Coef. (% of Total) 

PC-DB 100% 52.3% 26.2% 0.6 26.2% 25.2% 1 1.0% 10 47.7% 38.1% SO4 3*f(RH) 9.5% 

If you are given Total PM10 emissions in lb/hr:

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold Value is Input by user.)

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (lb/hr) (lb/hr) (lb/hr) Coef. (lb/hr) (lb/hr) Coef. (lb/hr) Coef. (lb/hr) (lb/hr) Type Ext.Coef. (lb/hr) 

PC-DB 70.5 36.9 18.4 0.6 18.4 17.8 1 0.7 10 33.6 26.9 SO4 3 6.7 

Weighted Extinction 11.1 17.8 6.8 80.6 

If you are given Total PM10 emissions in lb/mmBtu:

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold Value is Input by user.)

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Type Ext.Coef. (lb/mmBtu) 

PC-DB 0.02 0.010 0.01 0.6 0.01 0.00 1 0.0002 10 0.01 0.01 SO4 3 0.00 

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold values from Table 1.1-5 and from Table 6 of EPA’s January 2002 DRAFT “Catalog of Global Emissions Inventories and Emission Inventory Tools for Blac

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (% of Total) (% of Total) (% of Filterable) Coef. (% of Filterable) (% of Filterable) 1 (% of Filterable) Coef. (% of Total) (% of Condensible) Type Ext.Coef. (% of Condensib

PC-DB 100% 52.3% 50.0% 0.6 50.0% 48.2% 1 1.9% 10 47.7% 80.0% SO4 3 20.0% 

(% of Fine) Coef. (% of Fine) Coef.

96.3% 1 3.7% 10

If you are given Filterable PM10 emissions in lb/hr:

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold Value is Input by user.)

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (lb/hr) (lb/hr) (lb/hr) Coef. (lb/hr) (lb/hr) Coef. (lb/hr) Coef. (lb/hr) (lb/hr) Type Ext.Coef. (lb/hr) 

PC-DB 70.5 36.9 18.4 0.6 18.4 17.8 1 0.7 10 33.6 26.9 SO4 3 6.7 

If you are given Filterable PM10 emissions in lb/mmBtu:

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold Value is Input by user.)

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Type Ext.Coef. (lb/mmBtu) 

PC-DB 0.02 0.010 0.01 0.6 0.01 0.00 1 0.0002 10 0.01 0.01 SO4 3 0.00 

Coarse 26.2% Coarse 18.4Fine Soil 25.2% Fine Soil 17.8Fine EC 1.0% Fine EC 0.7CPM IOR 38.1% CPM IOR 26.9CPM OR 9.5% CPM OR 6.7

100.0% 70.5

Unit 2
Unit 2

Dry-Bottom PC Boiler w FGD + FF PM10 Speciation Profile

26.2%

25.2%

1.0%

38.1%

9.5%
Unit 2

Dry-Bottom PC Boiler w FGD + FF PM10 Emissions (lb/hr)

18.4

17.8

0.7

26.9

6.7
PC with FGD + Fabric Filter

from AP-42 Table 1.1-6(User inputs filterable emission rate in lb/hr)

Particle Cumulative Mass Fraction of PM10 Particle Emissions

Size < Stated Size < Stated Size Size Range by size

(um) FF (%) (um) (lb/hr)

10 92% 100% 10-6 6.0

6 77% 84% 6-2.5 9.6

2.5 53% 58% 2.5-1.25 8.8

1.25 31% 34% 1.25-1.0 2.4

1 25% 27% 1.0-625 4.4

0.625 14% 15% 0.625-0 5.6

CALPUFF Filterable Filterable

Particle Particle Size Fraction Emissions Extinction Emissions

Size (um) Range (um) (% of Total) (lb/hr) Coef. (g/sec)

8 10-6 16% 6.0 0.6 0.76

4.25 6-2.5 26% 9.6 0.6 1.21 42% Coarse >/1.88 2.5-1.25 24% 8.8 1 1.11 58% Fine Soil <1.25 1.25-1 7% 2.4 1 0.30

0.813 1.6-25 12% 4.4 1 0.56

0.625 0.625-0 15% 5.6 1 0.62

10 0.09 3.7% of Fine is 

Totals 100% 36.9 4.65

Unit 2
Unit 2

Dry-Bottom PC Boiler w FGD + FF Fraction of Filterable PM

16%

26%

24%

7%

12%

15%
Unit 2

Dry-Bottom PC Boiler w FGD + FF Filterable PM10 Emissions (lb/hr) in Each Size R

6.0

9.6

8.8

2.4

4.4

5.6
Unit 3 Baseline (Consent Decree)

Controlled PM10 Speciation from AP-42 Tables 1.1-5 & 1.1-6Dry Bottom Boiler burning Pulverized Coal using FGD+FF for Emissions controlassumes heating value of 9,692 Btu/lb and a sulfur content of 0.77 % and an ash content of 21.29 % and a heat input 5,758 mmBtu/hr and f(RH) = 

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold values from Table 1.1-5.)

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) (lb/ton) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Type Ext.Coef. (lb/mmBtu) 

PC-DB 0.0420 0.0220 0.0110 0.6 0.0110 0.0106 1 0.00041 10 0.020 0.016 SO4 3*f(RH) 0.004 

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold Values from Table 1.1-6.)

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (lb/ton) (lb/ton) (lb/ton) Coef. (lb/ton) (lb/ton) Coef. (lb/ton) Coef. (lb/ton) (lb/ton) Type Ext.Coef. (lb/ton) 

PC-DB 0.813 0.426 0.213 0.6 0.213 0.205 1 0.0079 10 0.388 0.310 SO4 3*f(RH) 0.078 

Controlled PM10 Emissions

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (% of Total) (% of Total) (% of Total) Coef. (% of Total) (% of Total) Coef. (% of Total) Coef. (% of Total) (% of Total) Type Ext.Coef. (% of Total) 

PC-DB 100% 52.3% 26.2% 0.6 26.2% 25.2% 1 1.0% 10 47.7% 38.1% SO4 3*f(RH) 9.5% 

If you are given Total PM10 emissions in lb/hr:

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold Value is Input by user.)

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (lb/hr) (lb/hr) (lb/hr) Coef. (lb/hr) (lb/hr) Coef. (lb/hr) Coef. (lb/hr) (lb/hr) Type Ext.Coef. (lb/hr) 

PC-DB 110.0 57.6 28.8 0.6 28.8 27.7 1 1.1 10 52.4 41.9 SO4 3 10.5 

Weighted Extinction 17.3 27.7 10.7 125.8 

If you are given Total PM10 emissions in lb/mmBtu:

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold Value is Input by user.)

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Type Ext.Coef. (lb/mmBtu) 

PC-DB 0.02 0.010 0.01 0.6 0.01 0.00 1 0.0002 10 0.01 0.01 SO4 3 0.00 

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold values from Table 1.1-5 and from Table 6 of EPA’s January 2002 DRAFT “Catalog of Global Emissions Inventories and Emission Inventory Tools for Blac

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (% of Total) (% of Total) (% of Filterable) Coef. (% of Filterable) (% of Filterable) 1 (% of Filterable) Coef. (% of Total) (% of Condensible) Type Ext.Coef. (% of Condensib

PC-DB 100% 52.3% 50.0% 0.6 50.0% 48.2% 1 1.9% 10 47.7% 80.0% SO4 3 20.0% 

(% of Fine) Coef. (% of Fine) Coef.

96.3% 1 3.7% 10

If you are given Filterable PM10 emissions in lb/hr:

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold Value is Input by user.)

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (lb/hr) (lb/hr) (lb/hr) Coef. (lb/hr) (lb/hr) Coef. (lb/hr) Coef. (lb/hr) (lb/hr) Type Ext.Coef. (lb/hr) 

PC-DB 110.0 57.6 28.8 0.6 28.8 27.7 1 1.1 10 52.4 41.9 SO4 3 10.5 

If you are given Filterable PM10 emissions in lb/mmBtu:

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold Value is Input by user.)

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Type Ext.Coef. (lb/mmBtu) 

PC-DB 0.02 0.010 0.01 0.6 0.01 0.00 1 0.0002 10 0.01 0.01 SO4 3 0.00 

Coarse 26.2% Coarse 28.8Fine Soil 25.2% Fine Soil 27.7Fine EC 1.0% Fine EC 1.1CPM IOR 38.1% CPM IOR 41.9CPM OR 9.5% CPM OR 10.5

100.0% 110.0

Unit 3
Unit 3

Dry-Bottom PC Boiler w FGD + FF PM10 Speciation Profile

26.2%

25.2%

1.0%

38.1%

9.5%
Unit 3

Dry-Bottom PC Boiler w FGD + FF PM10 Emissions (lb/hr)

28.8

27.7

1.1

41.9

10.5
PC with FGD + Fabric Filter

from AP-42 Table 1.1-6(User inputs filterable emission rate in lb/hr)

Particle Cumulative Mass Fraction of PM10 Particle Emissions

Size < Stated Size < Stated Size Size Range by size

(um) FF (%) (um) (lb/hr)

10 92% 100% 10-6 9.4

6 77% 84% 6-2.5 15.0

2.5 53% 58% 2.5-1.25 13.8

1.25 31% 34% 1.25-1.0 3.8

1 25% 27% 1.0-625 6.9

0.625 14% 15% 0.625-0 8.8

CALPUFF Filterable Filterable

Particle Particle Size Fraction Emissions Extinction Emissions

Size (um) Range (um) (% of Total) (lb/hr) Coef. (g/sec)

8 10-6 16% 9.4 0.6 1.18

4.25 6-2.5 26% 15.0 0.6 1.89 42% Coarse >/1.88 2.5-1.25 24% 13.8 1 1.74 58% Fine Soil <

1.25 1.25-1 7% 3.8 1 0.47

0.813 1.6-25 12% 6.9 1 0.87

0.625 0.625-0 15% 8.8 1 0.97

10 0.13 3.7% of Fine is 

Totals 100% 57.6 7.26

Unit 3
Unit 3

Dry-Bottom PC Boiler w FGD + FF Fraction of Filterable PM

16%

26%

24%

7%

12%

15%
Unit 3

Dry-Bottom PC Boiler w FGD + FF Filterable PM10 Emissions (lb/hr) in Each Size R

9.4

15.0

13.8

3.8

6.9

8.8
Unit 4 Baseline (Consent Decree)

Controlled PM10 Speciation from AP-42 Tables 1.1-5 & 1.1-6Dry Bottom Boiler burning Pulverized Coal using FGD+FF for Emissions controlassumes heating value of 9,692 Btu/lb and a sulfur content of 0.77 % and an ash content of 21.29 % and a heat input 5,649 mmBtu/hr and f(RH) = 

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold values from Table 1.1-5.)

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) (lb/ton) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Type Ext.Coef. (lb/mmBtu) 

PC-DB 0.0420 0.0220 0.0110 0.6 0.0110 0.0106 1 0.00041 10 0.020 0.016 SO4 3*f(RH) 0.004 

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold Values from Table 1.1-6.)

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (lb/ton) (lb/ton) (lb/ton) Coef. (lb/ton) (lb/ton) Coef. (lb/ton) Coef. (lb/ton) (lb/ton) Type Ext.Coef. (lb/ton) 

PC-DB 0.813 0.426 0.213 0.6 0.213 0.205 1 0.0079 10 0.388 0.310 SO4 3*f(RH) 0.078 

Controlled PM10 Emissions

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (% of Total) (% of Total) (% of Total) Coef. (% of Total) (% of Total) Coef. (% of Total) Coef. (% of Total) (% of Total) Type Ext.Coef. (% of Total) 

PC-DB 100% 52.3% 26.2% 0.6 26.2% 25.2% 1 1.0% 10 47.7% 38.1% SO4 3*f(RH) 9.5% 

If you are given Total PM10 emissions in lb/hr:

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold Value is Input by user.)

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (lb/hr) (lb/hr) (lb/hr) Coef. (lb/hr) (lb/hr) Coef. (lb/hr) Coef. (lb/hr) (lb/hr) Type Ext.Coef. (lb/hr) 

PC-DB 107.9 56.5 28.2 0.6 28.2 27.2 1 1.0 10 51.4 41.1 SO4 3 10.3 

Weighted Extinction 16.9 27.2 10.5 123.4 

If you are given Total PM10 emissions in lb/mmBtu:

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold Value is Input by user.)

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Type Ext.Coef. (lb/mmBtu) 

PC-DB 0.02 0.010 0.01 0.6 0.01 0.00 1 0.0002 10 0.01 0.01 SO4 3 0.00 

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold values from Table 1.1-5 and from Table 6 of EPA’s January 2002 DRAFT “Catalog of Global Emissions Inventories and Emission Inventory Tools for Blac

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (% of Total) (% of Total) (% of Filterable) Coef. (% of Filterable) (% of Filterable) 1 (% of Filterable) Coef. (% of Total) (% of Condensible) Type Ext.Coef. (% of Condensib

PC-DB 100% 52.3% 50.0% 0.6 50.0% 48.2% 1 1.9% 10 47.7% 80.0% SO4 3 20.0% 

(% of Fine) Coef. (% of Fine) Coef.

96.3% 1 3.7% 10

If you are given Filterable PM10 emissions in lb/hr:

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold Value is Input by user.)

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (lb/hr) (lb/hr) (lb/hr) Coef. (lb/hr) (lb/hr) Coef. (lb/hr) Coef. (lb/hr) (lb/hr) Type Ext.Coef. (lb/hr) 

PC-DB 107.9 56.5 28.2 0.6 28.2 27.2 1 1.0 10 51.4 41.1 SO4 3 10.3 

If you are given Filterable PM10 emissions in lb/mmBtu:

Controlled PM10 Emissions (Bold Value is Input by user.)

Boiler Total PM10 Filterable Coarse Ext. Fine Fine Soil Ext. Fine EC Ext. Condensible CPM IOR Particle CPM OR 

Type (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) Coef. (lb/mmBtu) (lb/mmBtu) Type Ext.Coef. (lb/mmBtu) 

PC-DB 0.02 0.010 0.01 0.6 0.01 0.00 1 0.0002 10 0.01 0.01 SO4 3 0.00 

Coarse 26.2% Coarse 28.2Fine Soil 25.2% Fine Soil 27.2Fine EC 1.0% Fine EC 1.0CPM IOR 38.1% CPM IOR 41.1CPM OR 9.5% CPM OR 10.3

100.0% 107.9

Unit 4
Unit 4

Dry-Bottom PC Boiler w FGD + FF PM10 Speciation Profile

26.2%

25.2%

1.0%

38.1%

9.5%
Unit 4

Dry-Bottom PC Boiler w FGD + FF PM10 Emissions (lb/hr)

28.2

27.2

1.0

41.1

10.3
PC with FGD + Fabric Filter

from AP-42 Table 1.1-6(User inputs filterable emission rate in lb/hr)

Particle Cumulative Mass Fraction of PM10 Particle Emissions

Size < Stated Size < Stated Size Size Range by size

(um) FF (%) (um) (lb/hr)

10 92% 100% 10-6 9.2

6 77% 84% 6-2.5 14.7

2.5 53% 58% 2.5-1.25 13.5

1.25 31% 34% 1.25-1.0 3.7

1 25% 27% 1.0-625 6.8

0.625 14% 15% 0.625-0 8.6

CALPUFF Filterable Filterable

Particle Particle Size Fraction Emissions Extinction Emissions

Size (um) Range (um) (% of Total) (lb/hr) Coef. (g/sec)

8 10-6 16% 9.2 0.6 1.16

4.25 6-2.5 26% 14.7 0.6 1.86 42% Coarse >/1.88 2.5-1.25 24% 13.5 1 1.70 58% Fine Soil <

1.25 1.25-1 7% 3.7 1 0.46

0.813 1.6-25 12% 6.8 1 0.85

0.625 0.625-0 15% 8.6 1 0.95

10 0.13 3.7% of Fine is 

Totals 100% 56.5 7.12

Unit 4
Unit 4

Dry-Bottom PC Boiler w FGD + FF Fraction of Filterable PM

16%

26%

24%

7%

12%

15%
Unit 4

Dry-Bottom PC Boiler w FGD + FF Filterable PM10 Emissions (lb/hr) in Each Size R

9.2

14.7

13.5

3.7

6.8

8.6
PNM San Juan Generating Station Appendix E 

080828 E-1 

Appendix E 

Stack Outlet Conditions for Visibility Modeling 
PNM San Juan Generating Station 

080828 

SJGS Unit 1, Heat Input (HHV) = 3,707 MBtu/hrStack Outlet Conditions Flow (acfm) Stack Velocity (ft/s) Temperature (°F) Pressure (in, wg) NOx (lb/MBtu) NOx (lb/hr) SO2 (lb/MBtu) SO2 (lb/hr) PM (lb/MBtu) PM (lb/hr) SO3 (lb/MB

Pre-Consent Decree Operation 1,406,021 74 145.00 -0.20 0.43 1,592.0 0.24 877.8 0.050 185.4 0.013 Visibility Modeling Baseline CasePost-Consent Decree Upgrades (LNB/OFA, PJFF) 1,323,494 70 121.42 0.01 0.33 1,223.3 0.18 667.3 0.015 55.6 0.011 With additional PM Control Technologies1. WESP 1,323,494 70 121.42 0.01 0.33 1,223.3 0.18 667.3 0.010 37.1 0.007 Notes1. Emission levels (lb/MBtu) shown are on a 24-hour average basis.2. Emission in (lb/hr) is calculated based on the emission level (lb/MBtu) and design basis heat input.3. Emission levels on a 24-hour average basis are assumed to be similar to the annual average basis.4. Pre-consent decree operation emission level (lb/MBtu) are based on annual averages from year 2001 to 2003.5. Post-consent decree upgrades emissions for visibility modeling purpose are based on information provided by PNM, 4/19/2007.6. Stack velocity is calculated based upon volumetric flowrate and 6.10 m stack diameter.7. All flow conditions are based on the coal as shown in the Design Basis document.8. All SO3 emissions are reported as Sulfuric Acid Mist (H2SO4).

9. SO3 emissions for the pre- and post-consent decree cases are determined using the National Park Service calculation formula.

10. SO3 emissions for the additional NOx control technologies with catalyst accounts for an additional 1.0% SO2 to SO3 conversion (based on design basis economizer outlet SO2 levels) and 0% SO3 removal in PJFF.

11. Pre-CD flue gas flow, temperature, pressure properties were referenced from PM test reports for year 2001 to 2003.

Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM) - San Juan Generating Station (SJGS) Unit 1

Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Engineering Analysis

Stack Outlet Conditions for Visibility Modeling (24-hour Average Emission Rates) Rev. 7
PNM San Juan Generating Station 

080828 

SJGS Unit 2, Heat Input (HHV) = 3,688 MBtu/hrStack Outlet Conditions Flow (acfm) Stack Velocity (ft/s) Temperature (°F) Pressure (in, wg) NOx (lb/MBtu) NOx (lb/hr) SO2 (lb/MBtu) SO2 (lb/hr) PM (lb/MBtu) PM (lb/hr) SO3 (lb/MB

Pre-Consent Decree Operation 1,444,718 77 148.00 -0.16 0.45 1,649.3 0.23 844.0 0.050 184.4 0.013 Visibility Modeling Baseline CasePost-Consent Decree Upgrades (LNB/OFA, PJFF) 1,316,710 70 121.42 0.01 0.33 1,217.0 0.18 663.8 0.015 55.3 0.011 With additional PM Control Technologies1. WESP 1,316,710 70 121.42 0.01 0.33 1,217.0 0.18 663.8 0.010 36.9 0.007 Notes1. Emission levels (lb/MBtu) shown are on a 24-hour average basis.2. Emission in (lb/hr) is calculated based on the emission level (lb/MBtu) and design basis heat input.3. Emission levels on a 24-hour average basis are assumed to be similar to the annual average basis.4. Pre-consent decree operation emission level (lb/MBtu) are based on annual averages from year 2001 to 2003.5. Post-consent decree upgrades emissions for visibility modeling purpose are based on information provided by PNM, 4/19/2007.6. Stack velocity is calculated based upon volumetric flowrate and 6.10 m stack diameter.7. All flow conditions are based on the coal as shown in the Design Basis document.8. All SO3 emissions are reported as Sulfuric Acid Mist (H2SO4).

9. SO3 emissions for the pre- and post-consent decree cases are determined using the National Park Service calculation formula.

10. SO3 emissions for the additional NOx control technologies with catalyst accounts for an additional 1.0% SO2 to SO3 conversion (based on design basis economizer outlet SO2 levels) and 0% SO3 removal in PJFF.

11. Pre-CD flue gas flow, temperature, pressure properties were referenced from PM test reports for year 2001 to 2003.

Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM) - San Juan Generating Station (SJGS) Unit 2

Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Engineering Analysis

Stack Outlet Conditions for Visibility Modeling (24-hour Average Emission Rates) Rev. 7
PNM San Juan Generating Station 

080828 

SJGS Unit 3, Heat Input (HHV) = 5,758 MBtu/hrStack Outlet Conditions Flow (acfm) Stack Velocity (ft/s) Temperature (°F) Pressure (in, wg) NOx (lb/MBtu) NOx (lb/hr) SO2 (lb/MBtu) SO2 (lb/hr) PM (lb/MBtu) PM (lb/hr) SO3 (lb/MB

Pre-Consent Decree Operation 2,075,452 56 143.00 -0.22 0.42 2,405.5 0.28 1,591.1 0.050 287.9 0.013 Visibility Modeling Baseline CasePost-Consent Decree Upgrades (LNB/OFA, PJFF) 2,055,753 56 121.42 0.01 0.33 1,900.1 0.18 1,036.4 0.015 86.4 0.011 With additional PM Control Technologies1. WESP 2,055,753 56 121.42 0.01 0.33 1,900.1 0.18 1,036.4 0.010 57.6 0.007 Notes1. Emission levels (lb/MBtu) shown are on a 24-hour average basis.2. Emission in (lb/hr) is calculated based on the emission level (lb/MBtu) and design basis heat input.3. Emission levels on a 24-hour average basis are assumed to be similar to the annual average basis.4. Pre-consent decree operation emission level (lb/MBtu) are based on annual averages from year 2001 to 2003.5. Post-consent decree upgrades emissions for visibility modeling purpose are based on information provided by PNM, 4/19/2007.6. Stack velocity is calculated based upon volumetric flowrate and 6.10 m stack diameter.7. All flow conditions are based on the coal as shown in the Design Basis document.8. All SO3 emissions are reported as Sulfuric Acid Mist (H2SO4).

9. SO3 emissions for the pre- and post-consent decree cases are determined using the National Park Service calculation formula.

10. SO3 emissions for the additional NOx control technologies with catalyst accounts for an additional 1.0% SO2 to SO3 conversion (based on design basis economizer outlet SO2 levels) and 0% SO3 removal in PJFF.

11. Pre-CD flue gas flow, temperature, pressure properties were referenced from PM test reports for year 2001 to 2003.

Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM) - San Juan Generating Station (SJGS) Unit 3

Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Engineering Analysis

Stack Outlet Conditions for Visibility Modeling (24-hour Average Emission Rates) Rev. 7
PNM San Juan Generating Station 

080828 

SJGS Unit 4, Heat Input (HHV) = 5,649 MBtu/hrStack Outlet Conditions Flow (acfm) Stack Velocity (ft/s) Temperature (°F) Pressure (in, wg) NOx (lb/MBtu) NOx (lb/hr) SO2 (lb/MBtu) SO2 (lb/hr) PM (lb/MBtu) PM (lb/hr) SO3 (lb/MB

Pre-Consent Decree Operation 2,093,240 57 137.00 -0.21 0.42 2,399.6 0.29 1,662.4 0.050 282.5 0.013 Visibility Modeling Baseline CasePost-Consent Decree Upgrades (LNB/OFA, PJFF) 2,016,837 55 121.42 0.01 0.33 1,864.2 0.18 1,016.8 0.015 84.7 0.011 With additional PM Control Technologies1. WESP 2,016,837 55 121.42 0.01 0.33 1,864.2 0.18 1,016.8 0.010 56.5 0.007 Notes1. Emission levels (lb/MBtu) shown are on a 24-hour average basis.2. Emission in (lb/hr) is calculated based on the emission level (lb/MBtu) and design basis heat input.3. Emission levels on a 24-hour average basis are assumed to be similar to the annual average basis.4. Pre-consent decree operation emission level (lb/MBtu) are based on annual averages from year 2001 to 2003.5. Post-consent decree upgrades emissions for visibility modeling purpose are based on information provided by PNM, 4/19/2007.6. Stack velocity is calculated based upon volumetric flowrate and 6.10 m stack diameter.7. All flow conditions are based on the coal as shown in the Design Basis document.8. All SO3 emissions are reported as Sulfuric Acid Mist (H2SO4).

9. SO3 emissions for the pre- and post-consent decree cases are determined using the National Park Service calculation formula.

10. SO3 emissions for the additional NOx control technologies with catalyst accounts for an additional 1.0% SO2 to SO3 conversion (based on design basis economizer outlet SO2 levels) and 0% SO3 removal in PJFF.

11. Pre-CD flue gas flow, temperature, pressure properties were referenced from PM test reports for year 2001 to 2003.

Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM) - San Juan Generating Station (SJGS) Unit 4

Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Engineering Analysis

Stack Outlet Conditions for Visibility Modeling (24-hour Average Emission Rates) Rev. 7
PNM San Juan Generating Station Appendix F 

080828 F-1 

Appendix F 

Visibility Modeling Result Tables 
PNM San Juan Generating Station - Appendix F 

Page F1 of F21 

Appendix F 

Visibility Modeling Result Tables 
PNM San Juan Generating Station - Appendix F 

Page F2 of F21 

Table 1 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Facility 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.92 1.76 1.82 1.83 1.92 

Bandelier 1.31 1.86 1.51 1.56 1.86 

Black Canyon 1.14 1.34 1.40 1.29 1.40 

Canyonlands 2.59 2.04 2.00 2.21 2.59 

Capitol Reef 1.97 1.16 1.34 1.49 1.97 

Grand Canyon 1.14 0.93 0.81 0.96 1.14 

Great Sand Dunes 0.85 1.00 0.82 0.89 1.00 

La Garita 1.15 1.30 1.14 1.20 1.30 

Maroon Bells 0.67 0.78 0.63 0.70 0.78 

Mesa Verde 4.20 4.09 4.85 4.38 4.85 

Pecos 1.40 1.33 1.26 1.33 1.40 

Petrified Forest 1.13 0.79 0.74 0.88 1.13 

San Pedro 1.78 2.37 1.96 2.04 2.37 

West Elk 0.99 1.15 0.94 1.03 1.15 

Weminuche 1.51 1.85 1.69 1.69 1.85 

Wheeler Peak 1.00 0.95 1.05 1.00 1.05 

Overall 1.53 4.85 

 
PNM San Juan Generating Station - Appendix F 

Page F3 of F21 

Table 2 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Facility 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.69 1.65 1.49 1.61 1.69 

Bandelier 1.04 1.56 1.20 1.27 1.56 

Black Canyon 0.95 1.15 1.07 1.05 1.15 

Canyonlands 2.26 1.73 1.68 1.89 2.26 

Capitol Reef 1.81 0.82 1.05 1.23 1.81 

Grand Canyon 0.97 0.76 0.57 0.77 0.97 

Great Sand Dunes 0.63 0.71 0.64 0.66 0.71 

La Garita 0.86 0.94 0.90 0.90 0.94 

Maroon Bells 0.54 0.56 0.51 0.54 0.56 

Mesa Verde 3.38 3.53 3.80 3.57 3.80 

Pecos 1.05 1.09 1.00 1.05 1.09 

Petrified Forest 0.82 0.60 0.53 0.65 0.82 

San Pedro 1.40 2.01 1.56 1.66 2.01 

West Elk 0.80 0.91 0.83 0.85 0.91 

Weminuche 1.15 1.48 1.34 1.33 1.48 

Wheeler Peak 0.75 0.86 0.89 0.83 0.89 

Overall 1.24 3.80 

 
PNM San Juan Generating Station - Appendix F 

Page F4 of F21 

Table 3 

WESP Visibility Modeling Results - Facility 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.63 1.61 1.45 1.56 1.63 

Bandelier 1.01 1.50 1.12 1.21 1.50 

Black Canyon 0.92 1.12 1.04 1.03 1.12 

Canyonlands 2.17 1.69 1.60 1.82 2.17 

Capitol Reef 1.71 0.79 1.02 1.17 1.71 

Grand Canyon 0.95 0.74 0.54 0.74 0.95 

Great Sand Dunes 0.61 0.69 0.62 0.64 0.69 

La Garita 0.83 0.90 0.85 0.86 0.90 

Maroon Bells 0.53 0.54 0.50 0.52 0.54 

Mesa Verde 2.71 3.18 2.92 2.94 3.18 

Pecos 1.01 1.07 0.97 1.02 1.07 

Petrified Forest 0.79 0.58 0.51 0.63 0.79 

San Pedro 1.30 1.87 1.49 1.55 1.87 

West Elk 0.78 0.88 0.79 0.82 0.88 

Weminuche 1.10 1.39 1.30 1.26 1.39 

Wheeler Peak 0.73 0.83 0.84 0.80 0.84 

Overall 1.16 3.18 

 
PNM San Juan Generating Station - Appendix F 

Page F5 of F21 

Table 4

SJGS Facility Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visibility Modeling Re

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) Improvement ($

(98th Percentile, see Note 1)

Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for 

each Class 1 Area) (see Note 4)

Class 1 Area

Pre-Consent 

Decree Consent Decree WESP

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

Consent Decree

Consent Decree 

to WESP

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

WESP

Pre-Consent 

Decree to Consent 

Decree

Consent Decree 

WESP

Arches 1.92 1.69 1.63 0.23 0.06 0.29 201,624,454 871,698,413 Bandelier 1.86 1.56 1.50 0.31 0.06 0.36 150,397,394 998,490,909 Black Canyon 1.40 1.15 1.12 0.26 0.03 0.28 181,066,667 1,961,321,42Canyonlands 2.59 2.26 2.17 0.33 0.10 0.42 142,067,692 572,052,083 Capitol Reef 1.97 1.81 1.71 0.16 0.10 0.26 286,782,609 554,717,172 Grand Canyon 1.14 0.97 0.95 0.17 0.02 0.19 273,207,101 2,288,208,33Great Sand Dunes 1.00 0.71 0.69 0.29 0.02 0.31 160,878,049 2,745,850,00La Garita 1.30 0.94 0.90 0.36 0.04 0.40 128,255,556 1,277,139,53Maroon Bells 0.78 0.56 0.54 0.22 0.02 0.24 211,798,165 2,496,227,27Mesa Verde 4.85 3.80 3.18 1.06 0.62 1.68 43,682,119 88,862,460 Pecos 1.40 1.09 1.07 0.31 0.03 0.33 150,888,889 2,112,192,30Petrified Forest 1.13 0.82 0.79 0.31 0.02 0.34 148,463,023 2,288,208,33San Pedro 2.37 2.01 1.87 0.36 0.14 0.50 128,255,556 386,739,437 West Elk 1.15 0.91 0.88 0.24 0.03 0.27 194,000,000 1,615,205,88Weminuche 1.85 1.48 1.39 0.37 0.09 0.46 124,452,830 631,229,885 Wheeler Peak 1.05 0.89 0.84 0.16 0.05 0.21 290,389,937 1,056,096,15

Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data.2. NI = No Improvement3. NA = Not Applicable4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000):

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree $46,172Consent Decree to WESP $54,917Pre-Consent Decree to WESP $101,089
PNM San Juan Generating Station - Appendix F 

Page F6 of F21 

Table 5 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 1 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.82 0.68 0.60 0.70 0.82 

Bandelier 0.31 0.49 0.54 0.45 0.54 

Black Canyon 0.35 0.37 0.38 0.37 0.38 

Canyonlands 1.10 0.84 0.71 0.88 1.10 

Capitol Reef 0.76 0.23 0.32 0.44 0.76 

Grand Canyon 0.31 0.21 0.16 0.23 0.31 

Great Sand Dunes 0.18 0.20 0.17 0.18 0.20 

La Garita 0.26 0.28 0.29 0.28 0.29 

Maroon Bells 0.18 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.18 

Mesa Verde 1.51 1.79 1.67 1.66 1.79 

Pecos 0.29 0.31 0.35 0.32 0.35 

Petrified Forest 0.25 0.16 0.14 0.18 0.25 

San Pedro 0.61 0.73 0.63 0.66 0.73 

West Elk 0.27 0.28 0.25 0.27 0.28 

Weminuche 0.37 0.54 0.45 0.45 0.54 

Wheeler Peak 0.24 0.25 0.26 0.25 0.26 

Overall 0.47 1.79 

 
PNM San Juan Generating Station - Appendix F 

Page F7 of F21 

Table 6 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 1 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.69 0.54 0.52 0.58 0.69 

Bandelier 0.24 0.40 0.37 0.34 0.40 

Black Canyon 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.29 0.29 

Canyonlands 1.00 0.65 0.57 0.74 1.00 

Capitol Reef 0.57 0.18 0.23 0.33 0.57 

Grand Canyon 0.27 0.16 0.12 0.18 0.27 

Great Sand Dunes 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 

La Garita 0.19 0.21 0.21 0.20 0.21 

Maroon Bells 0.14 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.14 

Mesa Verde 1.35 1.40 1.27 1.34 1.40 

Pecos 0.23 0.24 0.27 0.25 0.27 

Petrified Forest 0.19 0.13 0.11 0.14 0.19 

San Pedro 0.44 0.59 0.50 0.51 0.59 

West Elk 0.22 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.22 

Weminuche 0.31 0.43 0.35 0.36 0.43 

Wheeler Peak 0.19 0.17 0.20 0.19 0.20 

Overall 0.37 1.40 

 
PNM San Juan Generating Station - Appendix F 

Page F8 of F21 

Table 7 

WESP Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 1 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.66 0.52 0.49 0.56 0.66 

Bandelier 0.23 0.38 0.35 0.32 0.38 

Black Canyon 0.28 0.28 0.27 0.27 0.28 

Canyonlands 0.97 0.63 0.55 0.71 0.97 

Capitol Reef 0.55 0.17 0.22 0.32 0.55 

Grand Canyon 0.26 0.16 0.12 0.18 0.26 

Great Sand Dunes 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.14 

La Garita 0.19 0.17 0.20 0.19 0.20 

Maroon Bells 0.13 0.11 0.10 0.11 0.13 

Mesa Verde 1.33 1.31 1.16 1.27 1.33 

Pecos 0.22 0.24 0.26 0.24 0.26 

Petrified Forest 0.18 0.12 0.11 0.14 0.18 

San Pedro 0.42 0.56 0.47 0.48 0.56 

West Elk 0.21 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.21 

Weminuche 0.28 0.41 0.31 0.33 0.41 

Wheeler Peak 0.18 0.16 0.19 0.18 0.19 

Overall 0.35 1.33 

 
PNM San Juan Generating Station - Appendix F 

Page F9 of F21 

Table 8

Unit 1 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visibility Modeling Resul

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) Improvement ($

(98th Percentile, see Note 1)

Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for 

each Class 1 Area) (see Note 4)

Class 1 Area

Pre-Consent 

Decree Consent Decree WESP

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

Consent Decree

Consent Decree 

to WESP

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

WESP

Pre-Consent 

Decree to Consent 

Decree

Consent Decree 

WESP

Arches 0.82 0.69 0.66 0.13 0.03 0.16 80,207,692 408,793,103 Bandelier 0.54 0.40 0.38 0.14 0.02 0.16 74,478,571 697,352,941 Black Canyon 0.38 0.29 0.28 0.09 0.01 0.10 115,855,556 846,785,714 Canyonlands 1.10 1.00 0.97 0.10 0.03 0.13 104,270,000 359,242,424 Capitol Reef 0.76 0.57 0.55 0.19 0.02 0.21 54,878,947 623,947,368 Grand Canyon 0.31 0.27 0.26 0.04 0.01 0.05 260,675,000 1,077,727,27Great Sand Dunes 0.20 0.14 0.14 0.06 0.00 0.06 173,783,333 2,963,750,00La Garita 0.29 0.21 0.20 0.08 0.01 0.09 130,337,500 1,317,222,22Maroon Bells 0.18 0.14 0.13 0.04 0.01 0.05 260,675,000 1,693,571,42Mesa Verde 1.79 1.40 1.33 0.39 0.07 0.46 26,735,897 174,338,235 Pecos 0.35 0.27 0.26 0.08 0.01 0.09 130,337,500 1,481,875,00Petrified Forest 0.25 0.19 0.18 0.06 0.01 0.07 173,783,333 1,317,222,22San Pedro 0.73 0.59 0.56 0.14 0.03 0.17 74,478,571 348,676,471 West Elk 0.28 0.22 0.21 0.06 0.01 0.07 173,783,333 1,317,222,22Weminuche 0.54 0.43 0.41 0.11 0.02 0.13 94,790,909 623,947,368 Wheeler Peak 0.26 0.20 0.19 0.06 0.01 0.07 173,783,333 1,481,875,00

Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data.2. NI = No Improvement3. NA = Not Applicable4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000):

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree $10,427Consent Decree to WESP $11,855Pre-Consent Decree to WESP $22,282
PNM San Juan Generating Station - Appendix F 

Page F10 of F21 

Table 9 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 2 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.83 0.64 0.58 0.68 0.83 

Bandelier 0.32 0.50 0.54 0.45 0.54 

Black Canyon 0.36 0.37 0.39 0.37 0.39 

Canyonlands 1.07 0.83 0.72 0.87 1.07 

Capitol Reef 0.78 0.23 0.31 0.44 0.78 

Grand Canyon 0.31 0.20 0.16 0.22 0.31 

Great Sand Dunes 0.19 0.21 0.17 0.19 0.21 

La Garita 0.26 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.29 

Maroon Bells 0.18 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.18 

Mesa Verde 1.49 1.82 1.66 1.66 1.82 

Pecos 0.29 0.31 0.36 0.32 0.36 

Petrified Forest 0.25 0.16 0.14 0.18 0.25 

San Pedro 0.63 0.73 0.64 0.67 0.73 

West Elk 0.27 0.29 0.26 0.27 0.29 

Weminuche 0.38 0.56 0.44 0.46 0.56 

Wheeler Peak 0.24 0.26 0.26 0.25 0.26 

Overall 0.47 1.82 

 
PNM San Juan Generating Station - Appendix F 

Page F11 of F21 

Table 10 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 2 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.69 0.54 0.52 0.58 0.69 

Bandelier 0.23 0.40 0.37 0.33 0.40 

Black Canyon 0.28 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.29 

Canyonlands 0.99 0.65 0.57 0.74 0.99 

Capitol Reef 0.57 0.18 0.23 0.33 0.57 

Grand Canyon 0.27 0.16 0.12 0.18 0.27 

Great Sand Dunes 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 

La Garita 0.19 0.21 0.21 0.20 0.21 

Maroon Bells 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.14 

Mesa Verde 1.35 1.40 1.26 1.34 1.40 

Pecos 0.23 0.24 0.27 0.25 0.27 

Petrified Forest 0.19 0.13 0.11 0.14 0.19 

San Pedro 0.44 0.58 0.50 0.51 0.58 

West Elk 0.22 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.22 

Weminuche 0.31 0.42 0.35 0.36 0.42 

Wheeler Peak 0.18 0.17 0.20 0.18 0.20 

Overall 0.37 1.40 

 
PNM San Juan Generating Station - Appendix F 

Page F12 of F21 

Table 11 

WESP Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 2 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.66 0.51 0.49 0.55 0.66 

Bandelier 0.22 0.38 0.35 0.32 0.38 

Black Canyon 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 

Canyonlands 0.96 0.62 0.55 0.71 0.96 

Capitol Reef 0.55 0.17 0.22 0.31 0.55 

Grand Canyon 0.26 0.16 0.12 0.18 0.26 

Great Sand Dunes 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.14 

La Garita 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 

Maroon Bells 0.13 0.11 0.10 0.11 0.13 

Mesa Verde 1.33 1.31 1.15 1.26 1.33 

Pecos 0.21 0.24 0.26 0.24 0.26 

Petrified Forest 0.18 0.12 0.10 0.14 0.18 

San Pedro 0.42 0.55 0.47 0.48 0.55 

West Elk 0.21 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.21 

Weminuche 0.27 0.41 0.31 0.33 0.41 

Wheeler Peak 0.18 0.16 0.19 0.18 0.19 

Overall 0.35 1.33 

 
PNM San Juan Generating Station - Appendix F 

Page F13 of F21 

Table 12

Unit 2 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visibility Modeling Resul

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) Improvement ($

(98th Percentile, see Note 1)

Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for 

each Class 1 Area) (see Note 4)

Class 1 Area

Pre-Consent 

Decree Consent Decree WESP

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

Consent Decree

Consent Decree 

to WESP

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

WESP

Pre-Consent 

Decree to Consent 

Decree

Consent Decree 

WESP

Arches 0.83 0.69 0.66 0.14 0.03 0.17 76,885,714 371,718,750 Bandelier 0.54 0.40 0.38 0.14 0.02 0.16 76,885,714 626,052,632 Black Canyon 0.39 0.29 0.27 0.10 0.02 0.12 107,640,000 743,437,500 Canyonlands 1.07 0.99 0.96 0.08 0.03 0.11 134,550,000 440,555,556 Capitol Reef 0.78 0.57 0.55 0.21 0.02 0.23 51,257,143 540,681,818 Grand Canyon 0.31 0.27 0.26 0.04 0.01 0.05 269,100,000 991,250,000 Great Sand Dunes 0.21 0.14 0.14 0.07 0.00 0.07 153,771,429 2,973,750,00La Garita 0.29 0.21 0.20 0.08 0.01 0.09 134,550,000 1,982,500,00Maroon Bells 0.18 0.14 0.13 0.04 0.01 0.05 269,100,000 1,486,875,00Mesa Verde 1.82 1.40 1.33 0.42 0.07 0.49 25,628,571 172,391,304 Pecos 0.36 0.27 0.26 0.09 0.01 0.10 119,600,000 1,321,666,66Petrified Forest 0.25 0.19 0.18 0.06 0.01 0.07 179,400,000 1,189,500,00San Pedro 0.73 0.58 0.55 0.15 0.03 0.18 71,760,000 440,555,556 West Elk 0.29 0.22 0.21 0.07 0.01 0.08 153,771,429 1,189,500,00Weminuche 0.56 0.42 0.41 0.14 0.01 0.15 76,885,714 1,081,363,63Wheeler Peak 0.26 0.20 0.19 0.06 0.01 0.07 179,400,000 1,321,666,66

Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data.2. NI = No Improvement3. NA = Not Applicable4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000):

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree $10,764Consent Decree to WESP $11,895Pre-Consent Decree to WESP $22,659
PNM San Juan Generating Station - Appendix F 

Page F14 of F21 

Table 13 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 3 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.04 0.81 0.72 0.86 1.04 

Bandelier 0.53 0.81 0.71 0.68 0.81 

Black Canyon 0.58 0.53 0.59 0.57 0.59 

Canyonlands 1.44 1.04 0.96 1.15 1.44 

Capitol Reef 1.10 0.38 0.52 0.67 1.10 

Grand Canyon 0.48 0.33 0.26 0.36 0.48 

Great Sand Dunes 0.28 0.33 0.27 0.29 0.33 

La Garita 0.40 0.44 0.43 0.42 0.44 

Maroon Bells 0.24 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 

Mesa Verde 1.92 2.18 2.14 2.08 2.18 

Pecos 0.48 0.52 0.58 0.53 0.58 

Petrified Forest 0.43 0.25 0.24 0.31 0.43 

San Pedro 0.88 1.03 0.88 0.93 1.03 

West Elk 0.38 0.42 0.38 0.39 0.42 

Weminuche 0.59 0.82 0.65 0.69 0.82 

Wheeler Peak 0.37 0.39 0.37 0.38 0.39 

Overall 0.66 2.18 

 
PNM San Juan Generating Station - Appendix F 

Page F15 of F21 

Table 14 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 3 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.89 0.65 0.66 0.73 0.89 

Bandelier 0.39 0.57 0.61 0.52 0.61 

Black Canyon 0.44 0.41 0.46 0.44 0.46 

Canyonlands 1.15 0.85 0.79 0.93 1.15 

Capitol Reef 0.86 0.26 0.36 0.49 0.86 

Grand Canyon 0.35 0.24 0.19 0.26 0.35 

Great Sand Dunes 0.21 0.24 0.21 0.22 0.24 

La Garita 0.29 0.33 0.33 0.32 0.33 

Maroon Bells 0.20 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.20 

Mesa Verde 1.56 1.90 1.74 1.73 1.90 

Pecos 0.35 0.36 0.42 0.38 0.42 

Petrified Forest 0.29 0.18 0.17 0.21 0.29 

San Pedro 0.70 0.81 0.72 0.74 0.81 

West Elk 0.30 0.33 0.35 0.33 0.35 

Weminuche 0.44 0.64 0.50 0.53 0.64 

Wheeler Peak 0.28 0.31 0.28 0.29 0.31 

Overall 0.52 1.90 

 
PNM San Juan Generating Station - Appendix F 

Page F16 of F21 

Table 15 

WESP Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 3 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.88 0.62 0.62 0.70 0.88 

Bandelier 0.37 0.52 0.59 0.49 0.59 

Black Canyon 0.41 0.40 0.45 0.42 0.45 

Canyonlands 1.12 0.82 0.74 0.89 1.12 

Capitol Reef 0.84 0.24 0.33 0.47 0.84 

Grand Canyon 0.34 0.23 0.18 0.25 0.34 

Great Sand Dunes 0.20 0.23 0.20 0.21 0.23 

La Garita 0.28 0.31 0.31 0.30 0.31 

Maroon Bells 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.18 0.19 

Mesa Verde 1.39 1.70 1.57 1.55 1.70 

Pecos 0.33 0.34 0.40 0.36 0.40 

Petrified Forest 0.28 0.18 0.16 0.21 0.28 

San Pedro 0.67 0.77 0.68 0.71 0.77 

West Elk 0.29 0.31 0.33 0.31 0.33 

Weminuche 0.42 0.59 0.47 0.49 0.59 

Wheeler Peak 0.27 0.30 0.27 0.28 0.30 

Overall 0.49 1.70 

 
PNM San Juan Generating Station - Appendix F 

Page F17 of F21 

Table 16

Unit 3 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visibility Modeling Resul

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) Improvement ($

(98th Percentile, see Note 1)

Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for 

each Class 1 Area) (see Note 4)

Class 1 Area

Pre-Consent 

Decree Consent Decree WESP

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

Consent Decree

Consent Decree 

to WESP

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

WESP

Pre-Consent 

Decree to Consent 

Decree

Consent Decree 

WESP

Arches 1.04 0.89 0.88 0.15 0.02 0.17 83,026,667 1,037,200,00Bandelier 0.81 0.61 0.59 0.20 0.03 0.23 62,270,000 622,320,000 Black Canyon 0.59 0.46 0.45 0.13 0.02 0.15 95,800,000 1,037,200,00Canyonlands 1.44 1.15 1.12 0.29 0.03 0.32 42,944,828 518,600,000 Capitol Reef 1.10 0.86 0.84 0.24 0.02 0.26 51,891,667 777,900,000 Grand Canyon 0.48 0.35 0.34 0.13 0.01 0.14 95,800,000 1,196,769,23Great Sand Dunes 0.33 0.24 0.23 0.09 0.01 0.10 138,377,778 1,414,363,63La Garita 0.44 0.33 0.31 0.11 0.02 0.13 113,218,182 818,842,105 Maroon Bells 0.25 0.20 0.19 0.05 0.01 0.06 249,080,000 1,555,800,00Mesa Verde 2.18 1.90 1.70 0.28 0.21 0.49 44,478,571 75,892,683 Pecos 0.58 0.42 0.40 0.16 0.02 0.18 77,837,500 676,434,783 Petrified Forest 0.43 0.29 0.28 0.14 0.01 0.15 88,957,143 2,222,571,42San Pedro 1.03 0.81 0.77 0.22 0.04 0.26 56,609,091 398,923,077 West Elk 0.42 0.35 0.33 0.07 0.02 0.09 177,914,286 972,375,000 Weminuche 0.82 0.64 0.59 0.18 0.05 0.23 69,188,889 324,125,000 Wheeler Peak 0.39 0.31 0.30 0.08 0.01 0.09 155,675,000 1,944,750,00

Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data.2. NI = No Improvement3. NA = Not Applicable4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000):

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree $12,454Consent Decree to WESP $15,558Pre-Consent Decree to WESP $28,012
PNM San Juan Generating Station - Appendix F 

Page F18 of F21 

Table 17 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 4 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.05 0.84 0.74 0.88 1.05 

Bandelier 0.54 0.81 0.71 0.69 0.81 

Black Canyon 0.58 0.54 0.59 0.57 0.59 

Canyonlands 1.47 1.06 0.97 1.17 1.47 

Capitol Reef 1.11 0.38 0.53 0.67 1.11 

Grand Canyon 0.48 0.34 0.27 0.36 0.48 

Great Sand Dunes 0.29 0.34 0.27 0.30 0.34 

La Garita 0.40 0.45 0.43 0.43 0.45 

Maroon Bells 0.24 0.25 0.24 0.24 0.25 

Mesa Verde 1.94 2.18 2.15 2.09 2.18 

Pecos 0.48 0.52 0.59 0.53 0.59 

Petrified Forest 0.44 0.27 0.25 0.32 0.44 

San Pedro 0.89 1.04 0.88 0.94 1.04 

West Elk 0.38 0.43 0.39 0.40 0.43 

Weminuche 0.59 0.81 0.65 0.68 0.81 

Wheeler Peak 0.37 0.41 0.38 0.39 0.41 

Overall 0.67 2.18 

 
PNM San Juan Generating Station - Appendix F 

Page F19 of F21 

Table 18 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 4 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.88 0.65 0.63 0.72 0.88 

Bandelier 0.38 0.56 0.60 0.51 0.60 

Black Canyon 0.42 0.42 0.44 0.43 0.44 

Canyonlands 1.14 0.85 0.78 0.92 1.14 

Capitol Reef 0.86 0.26 0.35 0.49 0.86 

Grand Canyon 0.36 0.24 0.18 0.26 0.36 

Great Sand Dunes 0.21 0.23 0.21 0.22 0.23 

La Garita 0.28 0.32 0.32 0.31 0.32 

Maroon Bells 0.20 0.19 0.18 0.19 0.20 

Mesa Verde 1.55 1.89 1.73 1.72 1.89 

Pecos 0.34 0.35 0.41 0.37 0.41 

Petrified Forest 0.29 0.18 0.17 0.21 0.29 

San Pedro 0.69 0.80 0.69 0.73 0.80 

West Elk 0.30 0.33 0.33 0.32 0.33 

Weminuche 0.43 0.63 0.49 0.52 0.63 

Wheeler Peak 0.28 0.30 0.28 0.29 0.30 

Overall 0.51 1.89 

 
PNM San Juan Generating Station - Appendix F 

Page F20 of F21 

Table 19 

WESP Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 4 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.87 0.61 0.59 0.69 0.87 

Bandelier 0.36 0.51 0.57 0.48 0.57 

Black Canyon 0.40 0.40 0.43 0.41 0.43 

Canyonlands 1.10 0.82 0.73 0.89 1.10 

Capitol Reef 0.84 0.24 0.32 0.47 0.84 

Grand Canyon 0.35 0.23 0.17 0.25 0.35 

Great Sand Dunes 0.19 0.23 0.19 0.20 0.23 

La Garita 0.28 0.30 0.30 0.29 0.30 

Maroon Bells 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.18 0.19 

Mesa Verde 1.40 1.68 1.56 1.55 1.68 

Pecos 0.32 0.34 0.39 0.35 0.39 

Petrified Forest 0.28 0.17 0.16 0.20 0.28 

San Pedro 0.66 0.76 0.64 0.69 0.76 

West Elk 0.29 0.32 0.32 0.31 0.32 

Weminuche 0.41 0.59 0.46 0.49 0.59 

Wheeler Peak 0.27 0.30 0.26 0.28 0.30 

Overall 0.48 1.68 

 
PNM San Juan Generating Station - Appendix F 

Page F21 of F21 

Table 20

Unit 4 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visibility Modeling Resul

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) Improvement ($

(98th Percentile, see Note 1)

Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for 

each Class 1 Area) (see Note 4)

Class 1 Area

Pre-Consent 

Decree Consent Decree WESP

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

Consent Decree

Consent Decree 

to WESP

Pre-Consent 

Decree to 

WESP

Pre-Consent 

Decree to Consent 

Decree

Consent Decree 

WESP

Arches 1.05 0.88 0.87 0.17 0.01 0.18 73,688,235 1,114,928,57Bandelier 0.81 0.60 0.57 0.21 0.03 0.24 59,652,381 578,111,111 Black Canyon 0.59 0.44 0.43 0.15 0.01 0.16 83,513,333 1,419,000,00Canyonlands 1.47 1.14 1.10 0.33 0.04 0.37 37,960,606 433,583,333 Capitol Reef 1.11 0.86 0.84 0.25 0.02 0.27 50,108,000 743,285,714 Grand Canyon 0.48 0.36 0.35 0.12 0.01 0.13 104,391,667 1,560,900,00Great Sand Dunes 0.34 0.23 0.23 0.11 0.00 0.11 113,881,818 3,902,250,00La Garita 0.45 0.32 0.30 0.13 0.02 0.15 96,361,538 867,166,667 Maroon Bells 0.25 0.20 0.19 0.05 0.01 0.06 250,540,000 1,951,125,00Mesa Verde 2.18 1.89 1.68 0.29 0.21 0.50 43,196,552 75,405,797 Pecos 0.59 0.41 0.39 0.18 0.03 0.21 69,594,444 624,360,000 Petrified Forest 0.44 0.29 0.28 0.15 0.01 0.16 83,513,333 1,300,750,00San Pedro 1.04 0.80 0.76 0.24 0.04 0.28 52,195,833 380,707,317 West Elk 0.43 0.33 0.32 0.10 0.01 0.11 125,270,000 1,560,900,00Weminuche 0.81 0.63 0.59 0.18 0.04 0.22 69,594,444 354,750,000 Wheeler Peak 0.41 0.30 0.30 0.11 0.00 0.11 113,881,818 3,902,250,00

Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data.2. NI = No Improvement3. NA = Not Applicable4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000):

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree $12,527Consent Decree to WESP $15,609Pre-Consent Decree to WESP $28,136
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 59 1.92 71.14 23.07 1.46 0.89 1.08 2.36 100

BAND 70 1.31 35.48 59.51 1.32 0.81 0.83 2.06 100

BLCA 40 1.14 52.26 45.03 0.71 0.44 0.43 1.13 100

CANY 80 2.59 65.05 28.99 1.51 0.92 1.08 2.44 100

CARE 31 1.97 51.54 43.71 1.15 0.71 1.06 1.83 100

GRCA 14 1.14 42.20 54.25 0.90 0.55 0.65 1.45 100

GRSA 23 0.85 77.31 14.03 2.38 1.46 1.09 3.75 100

LAGA 35 1.15 42.48 54.54 0.77 0.47 0.50 1.24 100

MABE 16 0.67 41.50 54.30 1.08 0.66 0.76 1.70 100

MEVE 184 4.20 84.29 1.94 3.21 1.97 3.57 5.03 100

PECO 53 1.40 43.19 52.60 1.08 0.66 0.76 1.71 100

PEFO 18 1.13 84.94 9.80 1.30 0.79 1.11 2.06 100

SAPE 111 1.78 79.88 8.73 2.70 1.65 2.83 4.20 100

WEEL 34 0.99 40.76 54.57 1.20 0.73 0.85 1.89 100

WEMI 74 1.51 26.70 66.76 1.53 0.94 1.66 2.40 100

WHPE 37 1.00 32.06 63.10 1.28 0.78 0.76 2.02 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 47 1.69 33.57 62.13 1.88 0.48 0.48 1.46 100

BAND 49 1.04 30.40 66.83 1.26 0.32 0.23 0.97 100

BLCA 26 0.95 37.13 57.66 2.28 0.58 0.58 1.76 100

CANY 67 2.26 55.66 38.57 2.53 0.65 0.62 1.98 100

CARE 28 1.81 52.95 42.68 1.91 0.49 0.48 1.49 100

GRCA 12 0.97 38.14 59.75 0.93 0.24 0.19 0.75 100

GRSA 14 0.63 38.82 54.18 3.18 0.81 0.53 2.47 100

LAGA 20 0.86 38.38 59.80 0.81 0.21 0.15 0.65 100

MABE 10 0.54 69.46 25.41 2.29 0.59 0.43 1.83 100

MEVE 157 3.38 75.39 9.84 6.26 1.60 2.09 4.82 100

PECO 35 1.05 80.51 15.41 1.83 0.47 0.36 1.43 100

PEFO 14 0.82 27.95 69.41 1.18 0.30 0.25 0.92 100

SAPE 93 1.40 39.89 53.93 2.71 0.69 0.68 2.09 100

WEEL 19 0.80 37.76 60.62 0.70 0.18 0.19 0.55 100

WEMI 53 1.15 28.74 65.59 2.44 0.62 0.72 1.88 100

WHPE 27 0.75 30.82 66.18 1.36 0.35 0.23 1.06 100

WESP

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 45 1.63 62.82 32.85 1.87 0.48 0.54 1.45 100

BAND 47 1.01 27.51 70.57 0.87 0.22 0.16 0.67 100

BLCA 24 0.92 25.38 72.64 0.90 0.23 0.16 0.69 100

CANY 63 2.17 66.43 31.20 1.05 0.27 0.22 0.83 100

CARE 27 1.71 50.35 46.55 1.36 0.35 0.34 1.05 100

GRCA 12 0.95 35.80 62.76 0.64 0.16 0.13 0.51 100

GRSA 13 0.61 31.43 67.21 0.62 0.16 0.09 0.48 100

LAGA 19 0.83 58.25 38.59 1.43 0.37 0.25 1.11 100

MABE 9 0.53 63.52 33.00 1.56 0.40 0.29 1.24 100

MEVE 146 2.71 71.64 15.63 5.41 1.38 1.80 4.14 100

PECO 34 1.01 38.97 59.21 0.82 0.21 0.16 0.64 100

PEFO 14 0.79 25.59 72.59 0.81 0.21 0.17 0.63 100

SAPE 88 1.30 34.19 61.37 1.96 0.50 0.49 1.50 100

WEEL 18 0.78 36.47 62.42 0.48 0.12 0.13 0.37 100

WEMI 49 1.10 24.27 71.74 1.72 0.44 0.51 1.32 100

WHPE 25 0.73 49.56 48.24 1.01 0.26 0.14 0.80 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 46 1.76 43.87 46.41 2.37 1.45 2.20 3.70 100

BAND 87 1.86 44.28 49.89 1.45 0.89 1.18 2.31 100

BLCA 54 1.34 35.37 59.23 1.36 0.83 1.04 2.17 100

CANY 67 2.04 83.50 1.79 3.67 2.25 3.05 5.74 100

CARE 24 1.16 33.88 63.47 0.67 0.41 0.49 1.09 100

GRCA 15 0.93 89.85 2.03 2.09 1.28 1.45 3.30 100

GRSA 28 1.00 82.39 12.99 1.20 0.73 0.78 1.90 100

LAGA 63 1.30 81.37 13.32 1.40 0.86 0.81 2.24 100

MABE 20 0.78 28.96 63.27 2.15 1.32 0.80 3.49 100

MEVE 184 4.09 34.40 60.73 1.18 0.72 1.11 1.87 100

PECO 62 1.33 53.02 40.33 1.81 1.11 0.89 2.85 100

PEFO 16 0.79 90.95 1.94 1.81 1.11 1.31 2.89 100

SAPE 125 2.37 71.74 23.38 1.23 0.75 0.94 1.96 100

WEEL 43 1.15 35.15 60.78 1.03 0.63 0.76 1.65 100

WEMI 117 1.85 57.89 29.83 2.89 1.77 3.13 4.49 100

WHPE 40 0.95 55.69 38.20 1.67 1.02 0.74 2.67 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 32 1.65 49.70 47.38 1.28 0.33 0.30 1.01 100

BAND 61 1.56 37.39 59.91 1.19 0.30 0.27 0.93 100

BLCA 30 1.15 31.11 65.99 1.28 0.33 0.28 1.02 100

CANY 57 1.73 52.51 43.96 1.55 0.40 0.35 1.23 100

CARE 18 0.82 91.30 1.66 3.11 0.79 0.69 2.46 100

GRCA 10 0.76 44.30 54.26 0.64 0.16 0.12 0.52 100

GRSA 17 0.71 28.48 69.87 0.74 0.19 0.13 0.60 100

LAGA 40 0.94 26.32 71.29 1.07 0.27 0.22 0.84 100

MABE 11 0.56 84.39 12.71 1.31 0.33 0.23 1.03 100

MEVE 162 3.53 85.08 5.44 4.14 1.06 1.04 3.24 100

PECO 41 1.09 41.87 56.64 0.66 0.17 0.13 0.53 100

PEFO 9 0.60 28.65 69.64 0.76 0.19 0.13 0.62 100

SAPE 109 2.01 46.15 47.36 2.82 0.72 0.76 2.19 100

WEEL 24 0.91 30.66 67.44 0.86 0.22 0.14 0.68 100

WEMI 83 1.48 57.20 35.77 3.02 0.77 0.91 2.32 100

WHPE 20 0.86 47.51 47.27 2.35 0.60 0.43 1.84 100

WESP

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 29 1.61 46.70 51.30 0.88 0.22 0.21 0.69 100

BAND 55 1.50 40.32 57.22 1.09 0.28 0.24 0.85 100

BLCA 27 1.12 27.57 70.45 0.88 0.22 0.19 0.70 100

CANY 52 1.69 48.49 49.10 1.06 0.27 0.24 0.84 100

CARE 17 0.79 28.97 70.10 0.41 0.10 0.10 0.32 100

GRCA 9 0.74 43.17 55.84 0.44 0.11 0.08 0.36 100

GRSA 15 0.69 26.74 72.12 0.51 0.13 0.09 0.41 100

LAGA 35 0.90 19.19 78.22 1.18 0.30 0.20 0.91 100

MABE 11 0.54 24.53 71.85 1.68 0.43 0.18 1.34 100

MEVE 151 3.18 27.60 70.85 0.68 0.17 0.15 0.54 100

PECO 34 1.07 40.71 58.27 0.46 0.12 0.09 0.36 100

PEFO 9 0.58 27.22 71.61 0.52 0.13 0.09 0.42 100

SAPE 97 1.87 30.41 65.41 1.85 0.47 0.45 1.41 100

WEEL 23 0.88 22.74 75.15 0.92 0.23 0.24 0.71 100

WEMI 74 1.39 51.69 43.31 2.16 0.55 0.65 1.65 100

WHPE 18 0.83 41.56 54.84 1.62 0.41 0.29 1.26 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 39 1.82 38.16 50.64 2.67 1.63 2.75 4.15 100

BAND 77 1.51 40.84 49.83 2.33 1.43 1.94 3.63 100

BLCA 30 1.40 29.26 67.79 0.76 0.46 0.52 1.21 100

CANY 57 2.00 64.92 31.30 0.94 0.58 0.72 1.53 100

CARE 25 1.34 43.68 49.81 1.57 0.96 1.51 2.47 100

GRCA 11 0.81 91.83 0.94 1.83 1.12 1.34 2.94 100

GRSA 26 0.82 50.03 45.62 1.12 0.68 0.79 1.76 100

LAGA 40 1.14 25.27 67.60 2.02 1.24 0.66 3.22 100

MABE 15 0.63 36.60 57.88 1.53 0.94 0.65 2.41 100

MEVE 174 4.85 69.32 17.06 3.27 2.00 3.22 5.14 100

PECO 63 1.26 49.00 43.40 1.87 1.15 1.66 2.93 100

PEFO 17 0.74 88.02 6.36 1.46 0.90 0.89 2.36 100

SAPE 127 1.96 80.84 9.41 2.36 1.45 2.22 3.73 100

WEEL 31 0.94 25.57 71.56 0.70 0.43 0.61 1.12 100

WEMI 87 1.69 40.63 54.52 1.17 0.72 1.13 1.84 100

WHPE 48 1.05 48.42 48.68 0.78 0.48 0.39 1.25 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 27 1.49 30.95 67.01 0.89 0.23 0.21 0.71 100

BAND 57 1.20 77.97 17.21 2.11 0.54 0.52 1.65 100

BLCA 21 1.07 27.98 70.17 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.65 100

CANY 48 1.68 70.45 24.81 2.07 0.53 0.49 1.65 100

CARE 23 1.05 52.60 45.24 0.94 0.24 0.20 0.77 100

GRCA 9 0.57 93.89 1.17 2.19 0.56 0.46 1.74 100

GRSA 15 0.64 27.42 70.94 0.76 0.19 0.09 0.60 100

LAGA 28 0.90 23.76 71.98 1.99 0.51 0.18 1.58 100

MABE 8 0.51 27.63 69.59 1.22 0.31 0.28 0.97 100

MEVE 159 3.80 41.19 53.18 2.41 0.62 0.72 1.88 100

PECO 50 1.00 51.25 46.75 0.89 0.23 0.18 0.70 100

PEFO 9 0.53 32.43 65.01 1.15 0.29 0.18 0.93 100

SAPE 97 1.56 37.04 56.49 2.78 0.71 0.83 2.15 100

WEEL 22 0.83 28.10 67.91 1.74 0.44 0.44 1.36 100

WEMI 63 1.34 36.23 61.45 1.00 0.26 0.29 0.77 100

WHPE 27 0.89 91.09 5.38 1.60 0.41 0.26 1.25 100

WESP

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 26 1.45 29.24 69.35 0.62 0.16 0.15 0.49 100

BAND 50 1.12 77.83 18.71 1.52 0.39 0.37 1.18 100

BLCA 21 1.04 26.30 72.43 0.57 0.14 0.11 0.45 100

CANY 46 1.60 67.06 29.60 1.46 0.37 0.34 1.16 100

CARE 22 1.02 50.54 47.97 0.65 0.17 0.14 0.53 100

GRCA 9 0.54 95.23 1.26 1.56 0.40 0.32 1.23 100

GRSA 13 0.62 25.64 73.23 0.52 0.13 0.06 0.41 100

LAGA 21 0.85 19.56 77.45 1.40 0.36 0.12 1.11 100

MABE 7 0.50 24.53 73.55 0.84 0.21 0.19 0.66 100

MEVE 145 2.92 78.37 3.17 7.90 2.01 2.49 6.04 100

PECO 44 0.97 28.35 69.19 1.11 0.28 0.22 0.85 100

PEFO 8 0.51 73.07 24.23 1.21 0.31 0.21 0.97 100

SAPE 93 1.49 30.00 65.46 1.96 0.50 0.58 1.50 100

WEEL 20 0.79 23.85 73.36 1.22 0.31 0.31 0.95 100

WEMI 59 1.30 34.09 64.30 0.69 0.18 0.20 0.53 100

WHPE 26 0.84 91.75 5.74 1.14 0.29 0.19 0.88 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 16 0.82 25.92 68.87 1.30 0.79 1.06 2.06 100

BAND 1 0.31 41.96 53.16 1.24 0.75 0.94 1.95 100

BLCA 2 0.35 31.77 66.43 0.47 0.29 0.29 0.75 100

CANY 28 1.10 43.62 52.48 0.91 0.55 1.03 1.41 100

CARE 12 0.76 26.38 71.01 0.64 0.38 0.58 1.01 100

GRCA 5 0.31 31.06 66.09 0.72 0.44 0.52 1.17 100

GRSA 0 0.18 87.77 6.73 1.38 0.83 1.12 2.17 100

LAGA 1 0.26 36.35 60.88 0.72 0.44 0.46 1.16 100

MABE 0 0.18 23.69 72.07 1.08 0.65 0.82 1.69 100

MEVE 55 1.51 47.09 35.97 3.88 2.35 4.67 6.04 100

PECO 2 0.29 24.39 68.71 1.72 1.04 1.48 2.67 100

PEFO 2 0.25 84.76 11.37 0.99 0.60 0.69 1.59 100

SAPE 10 0.61 26.56 68.07 1.32 0.80 1.20 2.05 100

WEEL 2 0.27 31.55 66.50 0.52 0.31 0.29 0.82 100

WEMI 3 0.37 22.71 69.34 1.89 1.14 1.99 2.93 100

WHPE 2 0.24 27.68 69.49 0.76 0.46 0.42 1.20 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.69 25.34 71.69 1.31 0.33 0.31 1.03 100

BAND 1 0.24 43.57 53.42 1.34 0.34 0.29 1.04 100

BLCA 2 0.29 23.45 74.26 0.99 0.25 0.26 0.78 100

CANY 22 1.00 38.19 59.52 1.01 0.26 0.23 0.80 100

CARE 11 0.57 26.93 71.52 0.67 0.17 0.17 0.53 100

GRCA 4 0.27 30.85 67.43 0.76 0.19 0.15 0.61 100

GRSA 0 0.14 21.45 76.75 0.80 0.20 0.17 0.63 100

LAGA 0 0.19 28.88 69.14 0.89 0.23 0.16 0.70 100

MABE 0 0.14 20.45 75.64 1.73 0.44 0.40 1.34 100

MEVE 38 1.35 35.69 59.62 2.00 0.51 0.63 1.55 100

PECO 1 0.23 25.62 70.23 1.82 0.47 0.44 1.41 100

PEFO 2 0.19 25.42 72.19 1.06 0.27 0.23 0.84 100

SAPE 7 0.44 27.36 69.47 1.39 0.36 0.35 1.08 100

WEEL 0 0.22 33.65 63.73 1.17 0.30 0.22 0.93 100

WEMI 2 0.31 30.63 61.38 3.48 0.89 0.91 2.70 100

WHPE 2 0.19 28.38 69.83 0.81 0.21 0.13 0.64 100

WESP

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 13 0.66 21.99 75.92 0.92 0.24 0.21 0.71 100

BAND 1 0.23 41.99 55.90 0.94 0.25 0.20 0.72 100

BLCA 2 0.28 21.30 77.10 0.70 0.18 0.18 0.54 100

CANY 20 0.97 35.55 62.86 0.70 0.18 0.16 0.55 100

CARE 10 0.55 25.06 73.87 0.47 0.12 0.12 0.36 100

GRCA 3 0.26 29.07 69.74 0.53 0.14 0.11 0.42 100

GRSA 0 0.13 30.98 64.24 2.19 0.57 0.36 1.67 100

LAGA 0 0.19 27.29 71.34 0.62 0.16 0.11 0.48 100

MABE 0 0.13 16.66 80.54 1.25 0.33 0.28 0.95 100

MEVE 32 1.33 29.21 67.58 1.37 0.36 0.43 1.04 100

PECO 1 0.22 37.84 60.38 0.80 0.21 0.16 0.62 100

PEFO 2 0.18 23.42 74.91 0.75 0.20 0.16 0.58 100

SAPE 7 0.42 24.48 73.27 0.99 0.26 0.24 0.75 100

WEEL 0 0.21 31.38 66.78 0.83 0.22 0.15 0.64 100

WEMI 2 0.28 25.04 68.96 2.64 0.69 0.68 2.00 100

WHPE 2 0.18 26.68 72.08 0.57 0.15 0.09 0.44 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 11 0.68 24.06 72.39 0.91 0.55 0.63 1.46 100

BAND 7 0.49 50.26 40.84 2.33 1.41 1.50 3.66 100

BLCA 4 0.37 19.24 76.63 0.99 0.60 0.99 1.55 100

CANY 16 0.84 30.14 66.46 0.85 0.51 0.67 1.36 100

CARE 4 0.23 29.36 68.45 0.54 0.33 0.45 0.87 100

GRCA 1 0.21 42.87 54.86 0.58 0.35 0.37 0.97 100

GRSA 0 0.20 27.46 69.95 0.68 0.41 0.39 1.10 100

LAGA 0 0.28 23.68 72.69 0.93 0.56 0.66 1.48 100

MABE 0 0.16 27.20 65.28 2.09 1.27 0.76 3.40 100

MEVE 73 1.79 37.50 56.98 1.29 0.78 1.40 2.05 100

PECO 3 0.31 38.08 53.60 2.22 1.34 1.25 3.51 100

PEFO 2 0.16 28.11 69.15 0.71 0.43 0.44 1.17 100

SAPE 27 0.73 26.46 67.64 1.45 0.88 1.29 2.29 100

WEEL 1 0.28 23.98 70.42 1.36 0.82 1.31 2.11 100

WEMI 9 0.54 43.96 46.81 2.18 1.32 2.34 3.39 100

WHPE 0 0.25 30.07 67.71 0.57 0.35 0.39 0.92 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.54 23.97 72.89 1.37 0.35 0.35 1.07 100

BAND 4 0.40 31.04 66.80 0.95 0.24 0.22 0.75 100

BLCA 1 0.29 25.16 72.63 0.98 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

CANY 13 0.65 23.43 73.82 1.20 0.31 0.31 0.94 100

CARE 3 0.18 31.45 66.94 0.71 0.18 0.15 0.57 100

GRCA 1 0.16 43.73 54.87 0.62 0.16 0.11 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.14 27.52 70.87 0.72 0.19 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 0 0.21 25.77 71.45 1.20 0.31 0.33 0.94 100

MABE 0 0.12 26.89 71.16 0.87 0.22 0.16 0.69 100

MEVE 52 1.40 60.18 31.05 3.70 0.95 1.26 2.86 100

PECO 3 0.24 40.91 57.63 0.65 0.17 0.13 0.52 100

PEFO 0 0.13 28.41 69.90 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.62 100

SAPE 16 0.59 26.83 69.85 1.45 0.37 0.35 1.14 100

WEEL 0 0.20 24.64 72.13 1.40 0.36 0.38 1.09 100

WEMI 6 0.43 24.32 73.64 0.90 0.23 0.19 0.72 100

WHPE 0 0.17 31.55 67.09 0.60 0.15 0.12 0.49 100

WESP

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.52 32.86 65.72 0.62 0.16 0.15 0.49 100

BAND 4 0.38 29.10 69.40 0.66 0.17 0.15 0.51 100

BLCA 1 0.28 22.79 75.67 0.69 0.18 0.14 0.54 100

CANY 12 0.63 20.90 77.17 0.84 0.22 0.21 0.65 100

CARE 2 0.17 30.05 68.83 0.49 0.13 0.10 0.39 100

GRCA 1 0.16 42.66 56.37 0.43 0.11 0.08 0.35 100

GRSA 0 0.14 25.84 73.05 0.50 0.13 0.08 0.40 100

LAGA 0 0.17 32.85 63.61 1.54 0.39 0.42 1.19 100

MABE 0 0.11 23.93 72.54 1.64 0.43 0.17 1.30 100

MEVE 43 1.31 51.89 41.79 2.69 0.70 0.90 2.03 100

PECO 2 0.24 39.78 59.21 0.45 0.12 0.09 0.35 100

PEFO 0 0.12 26.98 71.85 0.52 0.14 0.09 0.42 100

SAPE 9 0.56 23.72 73.92 1.04 0.27 0.25 0.80 100

WEEL 0 0.19 21.65 76.06 1.00 0.26 0.26 0.76 100

WEMI 3 0.41 21.96 76.61 0.63 0.17 0.13 0.50 100

WHPE 0 0.16 30.26 68.80 0.42 0.11 0.08 0.33 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.60 28.75 65.62 1.35 0.81 1.33 2.14 100

BAND 8 0.54 22.07 72.47 1.34 0.81 1.23 2.09 100

BLCA 2 0.38 34.19 62.97 0.72 0.43 0.54 1.15 100

CANY 14 0.71 29.97 59.10 2.54 1.54 2.91 3.94 100

CARE 3 0.32 86.40 1.13 3.02 1.83 2.88 4.74 100

GRCA 0 0.16 51.56 42.85 1.42 0.86 1.00 2.30 100

GRSA 1 0.17 19.79 77.41 0.69 0.42 0.59 1.10 100

LAGA 2 0.29 36.29 60.25 0.89 0.54 0.59 1.44 100

MABE 0 0.16 31.87 65.36 0.70 0.42 0.53 1.12 100

MEVE 60 1.67 38.31 45.74 3.66 2.22 4.38 5.69 100

PECO 3 0.35 51.53 42.28 1.61 0.98 1.01 2.59 100

PEFO 0 0.14 31.20 64.81 1.05 0.64 0.58 1.73 100

SAPE 13 0.63 34.16 60.15 1.34 0.81 1.43 2.10 100

WEEL 0 0.25 23.83 70.37 1.42 0.86 1.27 2.25 100

WEMI 4 0.45 21.90 69.56 2.19 1.33 1.52 3.49 100

WHPE 1 0.26 22.07 72.11 1.47 0.89 1.11 2.34 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.52 29.53 67.07 1.47 0.38 0.40 1.16 100

BAND 3 0.37 23.82 72.96 1.41 0.36 0.36 1.10 100

BLCA 0 0.28 25.40 72.77 0.80 0.20 0.19 0.64 100

CANY 12 0.57 38.31 60.22 0.65 0.17 0.14 0.52 100

CARE 2 0.23 31.26 65.22 1.53 0.39 0.39 1.20 100

GRCA 0 0.12 52.37 44.18 1.52 0.39 0.31 1.22 100

GRSA 1 0.14 27.01 70.46 1.12 0.29 0.22 0.89 100

LAGA 0 0.21 20.74 75.52 1.71 0.44 0.17 1.41 100

MABE 0 0.11 33.14 63.55 1.53 0.39 0.19 1.20 100

MEVE 48 1.27 41.93 48.61 4.01 1.03 1.33 3.10 100

PECO 1 0.27 46.70 51.27 0.91 0.23 0.15 0.73 100

PEFO 0 0.11 31.59 65.92 1.12 0.29 0.18 0.91 100

SAPE 7 0.50 26.74 68.42 2.08 0.53 0.62 1.61 100

WEEL 0 0.20 20.88 76.49 1.15 0.30 0.29 0.90 100

WEMI 3 0.35 45.71 42.80 4.96 1.27 1.43 3.84 100

WHPE 0 0.20 22.74 73.74 1.56 0.40 0.34 1.23 100

WESP

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 7 0.49 49.52 49.25 0.55 0.14 0.12 0.43 100

BAND 3 0.35 20.72 76.99 1.01 0.26 0.25 0.76 100

BLCA 0 0.27 23.68 75.05 0.56 0.15 0.13 0.44 100

CANY 11 0.55 42.01 55.79 0.97 0.25 0.23 0.76 100

CARE 2 0.22 28.24 69.26 1.09 0.29 0.28 0.84 100

GRCA 0 0.12 51.18 46.39 1.08 0.28 0.22 0.85 100

GRSA 1 0.14 24.39 73.84 0.80 0.21 0.15 0.62 100

LAGA 0 0.20 33.19 65.12 0.75 0.20 0.18 0.57 100

MABE 0 0.10 30.29 67.35 1.10 0.29 0.13 0.84 100

MEVE 43 1.16 34.79 62.53 1.14 0.30 0.37 0.87 100

PECO 1 0.26 23.34 74.67 0.90 0.23 0.17 0.68 100

PEFO 0 0.11 29.95 68.31 0.78 0.21 0.12 0.63 100

SAPE 7 0.47 23.38 73.47 1.36 0.36 0.39 1.04 100

WEEL 0 0.20 34.71 64.16 0.50 0.13 0.11 0.39 100

WEMI 3 0.31 28.56 69.85 0.70 0.18 0.15 0.55 100

WHPE 0 0.19 19.02 78.46 1.12 0.29 0.24 0.86 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 16 0.83 25.00 69.90 1.28 0.78 1.04 2.02 100

BAND 1 0.32 25.12 71.09 1.01 0.61 0.61 1.57 100

BLCA 3 0.36 23.37 71.60 1.28 0.78 0.99 1.98 100

CANY 27 1.07 40.57 55.69 0.86 0.53 1.00 1.35 100

CARE 12 0.78 25.24 72.22 0.62 0.38 0.56 0.99 100

GRCA 5 0.31 29.84 67.36 0.71 0.43 0.51 1.15 100

GRSA 0 0.19 32.82 57.23 2.66 1.62 1.52 4.16 100

LAGA 0 0.26 34.98 62.29 0.71 0.43 0.46 1.14 100

MABE 0 0.18 19.11 76.53 1.10 0.67 0.86 1.73 100

MEVE 56 1.49 45.92 37.44 3.81 2.32 4.60 5.92 100

PECO 2 0.29 84.16 9.33 1.63 0.99 1.33 2.56 100

PEFO 2 0.25 23.63 72.55 0.97 0.59 0.72 1.54 100

SAPE 11 0.63 25.41 69.31 1.29 0.79 1.19 2.01 100

WEEL 1 0.27 30.10 67.99 0.51 0.31 0.29 0.80 100

WEMI 3 0.38 31.78 59.74 2.05 1.25 1.98 3.19 100

WHPE 2 0.24 26.23 70.99 0.74 0.45 0.42 1.17 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.69 25.31 71.71 1.31 0.34 0.31 1.02 100

BAND 1 0.23 43.57 53.42 1.34 0.34 0.29 1.03 100

BLCA 2 0.28 23.45 74.26 1.00 0.26 0.26 0.77 100

CANY 22 0.99 38.13 59.58 1.01 0.26 0.23 0.80 100

CARE 10 0.57 26.92 71.52 0.68 0.17 0.17 0.53 100

GRCA 4 0.27 30.84 67.43 0.76 0.20 0.15 0.61 100

GRSA 0 0.14 21.45 76.75 0.80 0.21 0.17 0.62 100

LAGA 0 0.19 28.87 69.14 0.89 0.23 0.16 0.70 100

MABE 0 0.14 20.45 75.64 1.74 0.44 0.40 1.33 100

MEVE 38 1.35 35.54 59.78 2.00 0.51 0.63 1.53 100

PECO 1 0.23 25.62 70.23 1.83 0.47 0.44 1.40 100

PEFO 2 0.19 25.42 72.18 1.07 0.27 0.23 0.83 100

SAPE 7 0.44 27.35 69.47 1.40 0.36 0.35 1.07 100

WEEL 0 0.22 33.65 63.72 1.18 0.30 0.22 0.92 100

WEMI 2 0.31 30.63 61.38 3.50 0.90 0.91 2.69 100

WHPE 2 0.18 28.38 69.83 0.82 0.21 0.13 0.64 100

WESP

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 13 0.66 21.98 75.94 0.91 0.24 0.21 0.71 100

BAND 1 0.22 42.00 55.91 0.93 0.25 0.20 0.72 100

BLCA 2 0.27 21.31 77.10 0.69 0.18 0.18 0.54 100

CANY 20 0.96 35.51 62.91 0.69 0.18 0.16 0.55 100

CARE 10 0.55 25.06 73.87 0.46 0.12 0.12 0.37 100

GRCA 3 0.26 29.07 69.74 0.52 0.14 0.11 0.42 100

GRSA 0 0.13 90.48 7.15 1.04 0.28 0.24 0.81 100

LAGA 0 0.19 27.29 71.34 0.61 0.16 0.11 0.48 100

MABE 0 0.13 16.68 80.54 1.22 0.33 0.28 0.95 100

MEVE 32 1.33 29.12 67.71 1.34 0.36 0.43 1.04 100

PECO 1 0.21 37.85 60.38 0.79 0.21 0.16 0.62 100

PEFO 2 0.18 23.43 74.91 0.73 0.20 0.16 0.58 100

SAPE 7 0.42 24.49 73.28 0.97 0.26 0.24 0.75 100

WEEL 0 0.21 31.39 66.78 0.81 0.22 0.15 0.64 100

WEMI 2 0.27 25.06 68.98 2.59 0.69 0.68 2.00 100

WHPE 2 0.18 26.69 72.08 0.56 0.15 0.09 0.44 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 11 0.64 26.15 67.85 1.45 0.89 1.39 2.27 100

BAND 7 0.50 48.55 42.63 2.30 1.40 1.49 3.62 100

BLCA 4 0.37 18.38 77.59 0.97 0.59 0.97 1.51 100

CANY 15 0.83 28.77 67.90 0.83 0.51 0.66 1.33 100

CARE 4 0.23 27.98 69.89 0.53 0.32 0.44 0.85 100

GRCA 1 0.20 40.86 56.90 0.57 0.35 0.37 0.95 100

GRSA 0 0.21 26.11 71.35 0.67 0.41 0.39 1.08 100

LAGA 0 0.29 22.65 73.82 0.90 0.55 0.64 1.44 100

MABE 0 0.16 26.26 66.39 2.05 1.25 0.74 3.32 100

MEVE 72 1.82 36.41 58.08 1.29 0.79 1.39 2.04 100

PECO 3 0.31 36.65 55.19 2.17 1.32 1.23 3.43 100

PEFO 2 0.16 26.72 70.61 0.69 0.42 0.43 1.13 100

SAPE 28 0.73 25.48 68.66 1.43 0.87 1.28 2.26 100

WEEL 1 0.29 22.95 71.57 1.32 0.81 1.29 2.06 100

WEMI 9 0.56 18.60 76.08 1.26 0.77 1.32 1.97 100

WHPE 0 0.26 28.49 69.36 0.55 0.33 0.38 0.89 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.54 23.96 72.89 1.38 0.35 0.35 1.07 100

BAND 4 0.40 31.03 66.81 0.95 0.24 0.22 0.74 100

BLCA 1 0.29 25.16 72.63 0.98 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

CANY 13 0.65 23.42 73.82 1.20 0.31 0.31 0.93 100

CARE 3 0.18 31.45 66.94 0.71 0.18 0.15 0.57 100

GRCA 1 0.16 43.73 54.87 0.62 0.16 0.11 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.14 27.52 70.87 0.73 0.19 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 0 0.21 25.77 71.45 1.21 0.31 0.33 0.93 100

MABE 0 0.11 26.89 71.16 0.88 0.22 0.16 0.69 100

MEVE 52 1.40 60.02 31.23 3.71 0.95 1.25 2.84 100

PECO 3 0.24 40.91 57.63 0.65 0.17 0.13 0.52 100

PEFO 0 0.13 28.41 69.90 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.61 100

SAPE 16 0.58 26.82 69.85 1.46 0.37 0.35 1.14 100

WEEL 0 0.20 24.64 72.13 1.41 0.36 0.38 1.08 100

WEMI 6 0.42 24.31 73.65 0.91 0.23 0.19 0.72 100

WHPE 0 0.17 31.55 67.09 0.61 0.16 0.12 0.48 100

WESP

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.51 32.86 65.72 0.61 0.16 0.15 0.49 100

BAND 4 0.38 29.10 69.41 0.65 0.17 0.15 0.51 100

BLCA 1 0.27 22.80 75.66 0.68 0.18 0.14 0.54 100

CANY 12 0.62 20.91 77.17 0.83 0.22 0.21 0.65 100

CARE 2 0.17 30.06 68.84 0.48 0.13 0.10 0.39 100

GRCA 1 0.16 42.67 56.37 0.42 0.11 0.08 0.35 100

GRSA 0 0.14 25.84 73.05 0.50 0.13 0.08 0.40 100

LAGA 0 0.20 23.14 74.92 0.84 0.22 0.23 0.65 100

MABE 0 0.11 23.95 72.54 1.61 0.43 0.17 1.30 100

MEVE 43 1.31 51.80 41.94 2.63 0.71 0.90 2.03 100

PECO 2 0.24 39.79 59.21 0.44 0.12 0.09 0.36 100

PEFO 0 0.12 26.99 71.85 0.51 0.14 0.09 0.42 100

SAPE 9 0.55 23.73 73.93 1.02 0.27 0.25 0.80 100

WEEL 0 0.19 21.66 76.07 0.98 0.26 0.26 0.76 100

WEMI 3 0.41 21.97 76.62 0.62 0.17 0.13 0.50 100

WHPE 0 0.16 30.27 68.80 0.41 0.11 0.08 0.33 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.58 26.09 65.91 1.91 1.16 1.95 2.97 100

BAND 8 0.54 21.18 73.48 1.31 0.80 1.19 2.04 100

BLCA 3 0.39 31.74 65.45 0.70 0.43 0.55 1.12 100

CANY 13 0.72 29.11 60.16 2.49 1.52 2.85 3.87 100

CARE 3 0.31 86.04 1.21 3.09 1.88 2.94 4.84 100

GRCA 0 0.16 49.96 44.45 1.42 0.86 1.00 2.29 100

GRSA 1 0.17 25.45 72.07 0.69 0.42 0.28 1.09 100

LAGA 1 0.29 19.38 74.87 1.61 0.98 0.49 2.66 100

MABE 0 0.16 31.67 65.36 0.73 0.45 0.63 1.16 100

MEVE 60 1.66 38.26 45.78 3.66 2.23 4.39 5.68 100

PECO 3 0.36 20.30 74.98 1.21 0.74 0.82 1.96 100

PEFO 0 0.14 69.40 24.51 1.58 0.96 0.97 2.58 100

SAPE 13 0.64 24.73 67.13 1.92 1.17 2.07 2.99 100

WEEL 0 0.26 22.86 71.46 1.39 0.85 1.25 2.20 100

WEMI 4 0.44 37.67 57.85 1.06 0.65 1.12 1.65 100

WHPE 1 0.26 32.19 65.39 0.61 0.37 0.45 0.98 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.52 29.52 67.08 1.47 0.38 0.40 1.15 100

BAND 3 0.37 23.81 72.96 1.42 0.36 0.36 1.09 100

BLCA 0 0.28 25.40 72.77 0.80 0.21 0.19 0.64 100

CANY 12 0.57 38.31 60.22 0.65 0.17 0.14 0.52 100

CARE 2 0.23 31.25 65.23 1.54 0.39 0.39 1.20 100

GRCA 0 0.12 52.36 44.18 1.53 0.39 0.31 1.22 100

GRSA 1 0.14 27.01 70.46 1.13 0.29 0.22 0.89 100

LAGA 0 0.21 20.74 75.52 1.72 0.44 0.17 1.40 100

MABE 0 0.11 33.14 63.55 1.54 0.39 0.19 1.19 100

MEVE 48 1.26 41.89 48.65 4.03 1.03 1.33 3.08 100

PECO 1 0.27 46.68 51.28 0.92 0.24 0.15 0.73 100

PEFO 0 0.11 72.61 23.59 1.70 0.44 0.30 1.37 100

SAPE 7 0.50 26.73 68.43 2.09 0.53 0.62 1.60 100

WEEL 0 0.20 20.87 76.49 1.16 0.30 0.29 0.89 100

WEMI 3 0.35 45.70 42.79 4.98 1.28 1.43 3.82 100

WHPE 0 0.20 22.74 73.73 1.56 0.40 0.34 1.22 100

WESP

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 7 0.49 49.51 49.26 0.54 0.14 0.12 0.43 100

BAND 3 0.35 20.73 77.00 0.99 0.26 0.25 0.77 100

BLCA 0 0.27 23.69 75.06 0.55 0.15 0.13 0.44 100

CANY 10 0.55 42.00 55.81 0.95 0.25 0.23 0.76 100

CARE 2 0.22 28.25 69.27 1.07 0.29 0.28 0.84 100

GRCA 0 0.12 51.19 46.39 1.06 0.28 0.22 0.85 100

GRSA 1 0.14 24.40 73.84 0.78 0.21 0.15 0.62 100

LAGA 0 0.20 33.20 65.12 0.73 0.20 0.18 0.57 100

MABE 0 0.10 30.31 67.35 1.08 0.29 0.13 0.84 100

MEVE 43 1.15 34.74 62.60 1.12 0.30 0.36 0.87 100

PECO 1 0.26 23.35 74.68 0.88 0.24 0.17 0.68 100

PEFO 0 0.10 29.96 68.32 0.77 0.21 0.12 0.63 100

SAPE 7 0.47 23.36 73.52 1.34 0.36 0.39 1.03 100

WEEL 0 0.20 34.72 64.16 0.49 0.13 0.11 0.39 100

WEMI 3 0.31 28.58 69.84 0.69 0.19 0.15 0.55 100

WHPE 0 0.19 19.03 78.47 1.10 0.29 0.24 0.87 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 1.04 37.90 59.89 0.56 0.35 0.41 0.89 100

BAND 9 0.53 76.32 16.85 1.73 1.07 1.30 2.73 100

BLCA 10 0.58 27.65 66.71 1.42 0.87 1.14 2.21 100

CANY 35 1.44 35.63 61.86 0.63 0.39 0.48 1.02 100

CARE 17 1.10 29.96 67.35 0.65 0.40 0.61 1.03 100

GRCA 7 0.48 30.18 67.22 0.65 0.40 0.53 1.03 100

GRSA 1 0.28 76.24 15.49 2.27 1.39 1.03 3.58 100

LAGA 4 0.40 39.72 57.57 0.70 0.43 0.45 1.13 100

MABE 1 0.24 35.97 61.92 0.56 0.35 0.32 0.89 100

MEVE 100 1.92 53.68 38.69 1.83 1.12 1.82 2.86 100

PECO 6 0.48 51.34 44.27 1.13 0.69 0.80 1.77 100

PEFO 5 0.43 86.46 10.06 0.89 0.55 0.62 1.42 100

SAPE 31 0.88 30.39 63.58 1.46 0.90 1.41 2.26 100

WEEL 6 0.38 37.70 56.66 1.47 0.91 0.92 2.33 100

WEMI 9 0.59 26.83 67.21 1.46 0.90 1.33 2.28 100

WHPE 5 0.37 29.53 67.67 0.74 0.45 0.44 1.17 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 0.89 35.30 62.84 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.66 100

BAND 3 0.39 26.98 70.54 1.12 0.28 0.21 0.87 100

BLCA 4 0.44 25.68 71.04 1.46 0.37 0.33 1.12 100

CANY 29 1.15 32.46 66.00 0.68 0.17 0.15 0.54 100

CARE 14 0.86 26.87 71.56 0.68 0.17 0.18 0.54 100

GRCA 5 0.35 27.44 70.95 0.71 0.18 0.17 0.56 100

GRSA 0 0.21 36.16 57.33 2.97 0.75 0.50 2.30 100

LAGA 1 0.29 25.67 70.62 1.64 0.42 0.37 1.27 100

MABE 0 0.20 33.23 64.11 1.21 0.30 0.21 0.95 100

MEVE 64 1.56 52.43 37.30 4.36 1.10 1.46 3.35 100

PECO 3 0.35 87.02 9.06 1.73 0.44 0.41 1.34 100

PEFO 2 0.29 85.92 11.67 1.07 0.27 0.21 0.85 100

SAPE 18 0.70 27.84 68.80 1.47 0.37 0.39 1.13 100

WEEL 4 0.30 34.05 62.90 1.38 0.35 0.24 1.08 100

WEMI 6 0.44 21.26 75.66 1.32 0.33 0.40 1.03 100

WHPE 2 0.28 27.58 70.65 0.80 0.20 0.14 0.63 100

WESP

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 0.88 32.73 66.01 0.56 0.14 0.12 0.45 100

BAND 3 0.37 81.21 15.56 1.44 0.35 0.32 1.12 100

BLCA 4 0.41 22.23 75.47 1.03 0.25 0.24 0.79 100

CANY 25 1.12 30.80 68.15 0.47 0.11 0.10 0.37 100

CARE 12 0.84 24.95 73.98 0.47 0.12 0.12 0.37 100

GRCA 5 0.34 25.77 73.13 0.48 0.12 0.11 0.38 100

GRSA 0 0.20 90.27 7.37 1.05 0.26 0.24 0.82 100

LAGA 1 0.28 27.05 71.55 0.63 0.16 0.11 0.50 100

MABE 0 0.19 31.00 67.14 0.84 0.21 0.15 0.66 100

MEVE 57 1.39 64.22 27.86 3.38 0.83 1.10 2.60 100

PECO 2 0.33 40.97 57.12 0.87 0.21 0.16 0.67 100

PEFO 2 0.28 86.23 12.11 0.74 0.18 0.15 0.59 100

SAPE 15 0.67 24.67 73.00 1.02 0.25 0.27 0.79 100

WEEL 4 0.29 31.39 66.47 0.97 0.24 0.17 0.76 100

WEMI 5 0.42 22.20 75.31 1.09 0.27 0.28 0.84 100

WHPE 2 0.27 25.88 72.91 0.55 0.14 0.09 0.43 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 15 0.81 31.17 63.37 1.30 0.80 1.33 2.03 100

BAND 20 0.81 28.33 63.99 1.89 1.16 1.69 2.94 100

BLCA 9 0.53 21.84 73.75 1.06 0.65 1.04 1.65 100

CANY 22 1.04 23.62 71.52 1.13 0.70 1.26 1.76 100

CARE 5 0.38 34.41 62.98 0.66 0.40 0.48 1.07 100

GRCA 3 0.33 45.95 51.86 0.55 0.34 0.36 0.92 100

GRSA 3 0.33 82.46 13.08 1.16 0.71 0.76 1.83 100

LAGA 5 0.44 25.09 67.37 1.91 1.17 1.50 2.97 100

MABE 0 0.25 28.79 63.57 2.12 1.30 0.81 3.42 100

MEVE 95 2.18 50.54 42.30 1.67 1.03 1.84 2.63 100

PECO 8 0.52 43.31 54.53 0.56 0.34 0.37 0.89 100

PEFO 5 0.25 91.13 1.98 1.75 1.08 1.27 2.80 100

SAPE 43 1.03 34.16 58.88 1.69 1.04 1.59 2.64 100

WEEL 5 0.42 34.33 58.68 1.81 1.11 1.22 2.86 100

WEMI 23 0.82 31.35 66.25 0.58 0.36 0.54 0.92 100

WHPE 3 0.39 33.90 60.27 1.53 0.94 0.95 2.41 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 12 0.65 29.26 66.96 1.65 0.42 0.45 1.27 100

BAND 10 0.57 52.51 41.86 2.54 0.64 0.47 1.97 100

BLCA 5 0.41 28.10 70.16 0.78 0.20 0.14 0.62 100

CANY 17 0.85 30.97 66.94 0.92 0.23 0.21 0.73 100

CARE 5 0.26 91.08 1.83 3.13 0.79 0.70 2.47 100

GRCA 3 0.24 42.65 55.95 0.62 0.16 0.12 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.24 27.92 70.46 0.73 0.18 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 1 0.33 22.49 73.90 1.64 0.41 0.29 1.26 100

MABE 0 0.18 27.59 70.65 0.80 0.20 0.13 0.63 100

MEVE 76 1.90 42.51 53.81 1.58 0.40 0.48 1.23 100

PECO 5 0.36 30.99 66.44 1.17 0.30 0.18 0.91 100

PEFO 3 0.18 28.46 69.86 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.61 100

SAPE 34 0.81 28.26 67.95 1.66 0.42 0.43 1.29 100

WEEL 4 0.33 32.22 63.43 1.95 0.49 0.38 1.52 100

WEMI 16 0.64 31.41 61.73 2.93 0.74 0.94 2.25 100

WHPE 0 0.31 44.36 54.39 0.55 0.14 0.11 0.44 100

WESP

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 12 0.62 28.98 69.76 0.56 0.14 0.12 0.44 100

BAND 10 0.52 50.03 45.88 1.85 0.46 0.34 1.44 100

BLCA 4 0.40 26.53 72.28 0.54 0.13 0.10 0.42 100

CANY 17 0.82 28.88 69.68 0.64 0.16 0.14 0.50 100

CARE 5 0.24 28.14 70.97 0.39 0.10 0.09 0.31 100

GRCA 2 0.23 41.56 57.49 0.42 0.10 0.08 0.35 100

GRSA 0 0.23 26.25 72.64 0.50 0.12 0.09 0.40 100

LAGA 1 0.31 19.05 78.41 1.16 0.29 0.20 0.89 100

MABE 0 0.18 26.46 72.13 0.63 0.15 0.12 0.50 100

MEVE 72 1.70 39.82 50.06 4.30 1.06 1.46 3.30 100

PECO 4 0.34 39.02 60.01 0.43 0.11 0.08 0.34 100

PEFO 3 0.18 27.04 71.81 0.52 0.13 0.09 0.42 100

SAPE 30 0.77 24.64 72.70 1.17 0.29 0.30 0.91 100

WEEL 4 0.31 24.93 73.89 0.53 0.13 0.09 0.42 100

WEMI 12 0.59 33.30 58.88 3.35 0.82 1.07 2.58 100

WHPE 0 0.30 43.48 55.67 0.38 0.09 0.08 0.30 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.72 30.15 61.20 2.06 1.26 2.13 3.19 100

BAND 15 0.71 23.24 69.03 1.92 1.18 1.63 2.99 100

BLCA 9 0.59 23.67 72.71 0.88 0.54 0.82 1.38 100

CANY 19 0.96 32.66 55.96 2.65 1.63 2.99 4.11 100

CARE 9 0.52 48.88 48.12 0.75 0.46 0.56 1.23 100

GRCA 3 0.26 91.93 1.11 1.76 1.08 1.29 2.83 100

GRSA 3 0.27 49.52 46.33 1.06 0.65 0.76 1.68 100

LAGA 5 0.43 22.09 71.73 1.75 1.07 0.58 2.78 100

MABE 0 0.25 27.57 67.94 1.12 0.69 0.91 1.76 100

MEVE 92 2.14 70.75 6.38 5.19 3.19 6.44 8.05 100

PECO 12 0.58 54.64 39.46 1.53 0.94 0.97 2.45 100

PEFO 1 0.24 88.09 6.50 1.41 0.87 0.86 2.28 100

SAPE 34 0.88 39.44 54.36 1.46 0.90 1.58 2.27 100

WEEL 4 0.38 22.78 73.96 0.83 0.51 0.60 1.31 100

WEMI 15 0.65 30.94 64.97 1.04 0.64 0.76 1.65 100

WHPE 4 0.37 24.02 69.82 1.56 0.96 1.20 2.46 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.66 29.12 65.81 2.19 0.55 0.65 1.68 100

BAND 8 0.61 31.91 64.13 1.75 0.44 0.40 1.36 100

BLCA 7 0.46 33.18 65.04 0.79 0.20 0.18 0.62 100

CANY 14 0.79 32.64 60.84 2.79 0.70 0.88 2.14 100

CARE 4 0.36 91.10 1.19 3.36 0.85 0.90 2.60 100

GRCA 0 0.19 52.76 43.76 1.54 0.39 0.32 1.23 100

GRSA 1 0.21 23.53 72.94 1.57 0.40 0.34 1.22 100

LAGA 3 0.33 21.25 74.88 1.79 0.45 0.16 1.47 100

MABE 0 0.18 22.58 74.94 1.09 0.27 0.27 0.85 100

MEVE 64 1.74 43.30 46.82 4.20 1.06 1.40 3.22 100

PECO 5 0.42 34.27 62.29 1.50 0.38 0.39 1.16 100

PEFO 1 0.17 72.31 23.90 1.69 0.43 0.30 1.36 100

SAPE 18 0.72 27.03 68.03 2.14 0.54 0.62 1.64 100

WEEL 2 0.35 23.08 74.48 1.07 0.27 0.28 0.83 100

WEMI 7 0.50 30.19 67.61 0.97 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

WHPE 2 0.28 90.86 5.64 1.60 0.40 0.26 1.24 100

WESP

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.62 24.83 71.54 1.57 0.39 0.46 1.21 100

BAND 8 0.59 20.02 77.64 1.03 0.25 0.27 0.79 100

BLCA 7 0.45 31.56 67.22 0.54 0.13 0.12 0.43 100

CANY 13 0.74 45.26 52.57 0.95 0.23 0.22 0.76 100

CARE 3 0.33 29.34 68.04 1.15 0.28 0.30 0.89 100

GRCA 0 0.18 51.56 46.01 1.08 0.27 0.22 0.86 100

GRSA 1 0.20 20.44 77.08 1.11 0.27 0.24 0.86 100

LAGA 3 0.31 35.26 63.25 0.67 0.17 0.12 0.54 100

MABE 0 0.17 20.01 78.27 0.76 0.19 0.19 0.59 100

MEVE 55 1.57 37.08 55.36 3.22 0.79 1.07 2.47 100

PECO 5 0.40 31.09 66.50 1.06 0.26 0.27 0.82 100

PEFO 1 0.16 72.09 25.25 1.19 0.29 0.21 0.96 100

SAPE 16 0.68 22.31 74.18 1.52 0.38 0.44 1.17 100

WEEL 1 0.33 20.44 77.87 0.74 0.18 0.19 0.58 100

WEMI 5 0.47 19.12 77.02 1.74 0.43 0.33 1.37 100

WHPE 2 0.27 91.52 6.01 1.13 0.28 0.19 0.88 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 1.05 38.73 59.14 0.54 0.33 0.40 0.86 100

BAND 9 0.54 77.25 16.22 1.66 1.02 1.24 2.61 100

BLCA 10 0.58 27.97 66.50 1.39 0.86 1.12 2.16 100

CANY 35 1.47 36.32 61.24 0.61 0.38 0.47 0.99 100

CARE 18 1.11 30.71 66.66 0.64 0.39 0.59 1.01 100

GRCA 7 0.48 31.01 66.45 0.63 0.39 0.51 1.00 100

GRSA 1 0.29 76.95 15.10 2.18 1.34 1.00 3.43 100

LAGA 4 0.40 40.66 56.73 0.68 0.42 0.44 1.09 100

MABE 1 0.24 69.36 25.32 1.36 0.84 0.94 2.18 100

MEVE 97 1.94 55.06 37.27 1.83 1.13 1.84 2.87 100

PECO 6 0.48 32.92 63.69 0.95 0.58 0.38 1.49 100

PEFO 5 0.44 29.28 67.84 0.68 0.42 0.71 1.07 100

SAPE 33 0.89 31.06 63.04 1.43 0.88 1.38 2.22 100

WEEL 6 0.38 38.50 56.07 1.42 0.88 0.88 2.25 100

WEMI 10 0.59 27.20 66.98 1.42 0.88 1.30 2.23 100

WHPE 5 0.37 30.24 67.03 0.72 0.44 0.43 1.14 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 0.88 35.06 63.08 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.66 100

BAND 3 0.38 26.97 70.54 1.12 0.29 0.20 0.87 100

BLCA 4 0.42 25.63 71.10 1.45 0.37 0.33 1.12 100

CANY 29 1.14 32.53 65.94 0.68 0.17 0.15 0.54 100

CARE 13 0.86 26.89 71.54 0.68 0.18 0.18 0.54 100

GRCA 5 0.36 27.72 70.68 0.70 0.18 0.16 0.55 100

GRSA 0 0.21 36.09 57.39 2.96 0.76 0.50 2.30 100

LAGA 1 0.28 36.17 62.10 0.77 0.20 0.14 0.61 100

MABE 0 0.20 33.07 64.29 1.19 0.31 0.21 0.94 100

MEVE 64 1.55 71.87 17.66 4.45 1.15 1.45 3.43 100

PECO 2 0.34 87.02 9.05 1.73 0.45 0.41 1.35 100

PEFO 2 0.29 85.93 11.66 1.07 0.28 0.21 0.85 100

SAPE 18 0.69 27.73 68.93 1.46 0.38 0.39 1.12 100

WEEL 4 0.30 33.81 63.19 1.36 0.35 0.23 1.07 100

WEMI 6 0.43 21.27 75.64 1.32 0.34 0.40 1.03 100

WHPE 2 0.28 27.76 70.47 0.80 0.21 0.13 0.63 100

WESP

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 17 0.87 32.51 66.24 0.56 0.14 0.12 0.44 100

BAND 3 0.36 81.19 15.57 1.44 0.36 0.33 1.11 100

BLCA 3 0.40 22.20 75.50 1.03 0.26 0.23 0.78 100

CANY 25 1.10 30.87 68.08 0.47 0.12 0.10 0.37 100

CARE 12 0.84 24.97 73.95 0.47 0.12 0.12 0.37 100

GRCA 5 0.35 26.06 72.84 0.48 0.12 0.11 0.38 100

GRSA 0 0.19 90.27 7.36 1.05 0.26 0.24 0.81 100

LAGA 1 0.28 34.69 64.13 0.53 0.13 0.10 0.42 100

MABE 0 0.19 30.86 67.31 0.83 0.21 0.15 0.65 100

MEVE 56 1.40 63.25 28.94 3.34 0.83 1.08 2.55 100

PECO 2 0.32 40.94 57.14 0.87 0.22 0.16 0.67 100

PEFO 2 0.28 86.24 12.10 0.74 0.19 0.15 0.58 100

SAPE 14 0.66 24.58 73.10 1.02 0.26 0.27 0.78 100

WEEL 4 0.29 31.17 66.73 0.96 0.24 0.16 0.74 100

WEMI 5 0.41 29.56 68.46 0.85 0.21 0.28 0.65 100

WHPE 2 0.27 26.07 72.71 0.55 0.14 0.09 0.43 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 15 0.84 33.46 63.61 0.73 0.45 0.58 1.17 100

BAND 20 0.81 53.16 38.54 2.16 1.33 1.41 3.39 100

BLCA 10 0.54 22.21 73.48 1.04 0.64 1.01 1.62 100

CANY 22 1.06 24.09 71.18 1.10 0.68 1.23 1.72 100

CARE 5 0.38 35.19 62.28 0.64 0.39 0.47 1.04 100

GRCA 3 0.34 47.06 50.82 0.54 0.33 0.35 0.90 100

GRSA 2 0.34 83.04 12.72 1.10 0.68 0.71 1.74 100

LAGA 4 0.45 81.97 13.16 1.28 0.79 0.74 2.05 100

MABE 0 0.25 28.95 63.55 2.07 1.28 0.79 3.36 100

MEVE 96 2.18 51.65 41.36 1.63 1.00 1.80 2.56 100

PECO 8 0.52 44.34 53.57 0.54 0.33 0.36 0.86 100

PEFO 5 0.27 91.57 1.90 1.66 1.02 1.20 2.65 100

SAPE 43 1.04 34.95 58.17 1.67 1.03 1.57 2.61 100

WEEL 5 0.43 35.21 57.78 1.81 1.12 1.23 2.86 100

WEMI 25 0.81 32.08 65.59 0.56 0.35 0.53 0.90 100

WHPE 4 0.41 34.54 59.79 1.49 0.92 0.93 2.35 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 12 0.65 29.14 67.09 1.64 0.42 0.45 1.27 100

BAND 10 0.56 52.56 41.80 2.54 0.65 0.47 1.98 100

BLCA 4 0.42 20.20 77.31 1.08 0.28 0.30 0.83 100

CANY 17 0.85 30.88 67.04 0.92 0.24 0.20 0.73 100

CARE 5 0.26 91.06 1.83 3.12 0.81 0.70 2.47 100

GRCA 3 0.24 42.57 56.03 0.62 0.16 0.12 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.23 28.00 70.38 0.73 0.19 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 1 0.32 22.47 73.91 1.64 0.42 0.29 1.27 100

MABE 0 0.19 28.63 66.47 2.26 0.58 0.24 1.82 100

MEVE 75 1.89 42.10 54.26 1.56 0.40 0.47 1.22 100

PECO 5 0.35 30.81 66.63 1.17 0.30 0.18 0.91 100

PEFO 3 0.18 28.47 69.84 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.61 100

SAPE 34 0.80 28.16 68.06 1.65 0.42 0.42 1.29 100

WEEL 4 0.33 24.93 71.68 1.47 0.38 0.41 1.13 100

WEMI 13 0.63 31.35 61.78 2.92 0.75 0.93 2.26 100

WHPE 0 0.30 44.20 54.55 0.55 0.14 0.11 0.44 100

WESP

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 11 0.61 29.00 69.74 0.56 0.14 0.12 0.44 100

BAND 10 0.51 50.09 45.81 1.86 0.46 0.34 1.43 100

BLCA 4 0.40 17.31 80.97 0.75 0.19 0.21 0.58 100

CANY 16 0.82 28.80 69.77 0.64 0.16 0.14 0.50 100

CARE 5 0.24 28.13 70.98 0.39 0.10 0.09 0.31 100

GRCA 2 0.23 41.47 57.57 0.42 0.11 0.08 0.35 100

GRSA 0 0.23 24.30 73.50 1.00 0.25 0.19 0.77 100

LAGA 1 0.30 19.03 78.42 1.17 0.29 0.20 0.89 100

MABE 0 0.18 26.45 72.15 0.63 0.16 0.12 0.49 100

MEVE 72 1.68 24.68 72.78 1.11 0.28 0.31 0.85 100

PECO 4 0.34 28.38 69.85 0.81 0.20 0.12 0.63 100

PEFO 2 0.17 27.05 71.79 0.52 0.13 0.09 0.42 100

SAPE 29 0.76 24.57 72.78 1.16 0.29 0.30 0.90 100

WEEL 4 0.32 21.79 75.83 1.04 0.26 0.29 0.79 100

WEMI 11 0.59 33.16 59.04 3.35 0.84 1.07 2.55 100

WHPE 0 0.30 43.32 55.83 0.38 0.09 0.08 0.30 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.74 30.46 60.93 2.04 1.26 2.14 3.18 100

BAND 15 0.71 23.48 68.94 1.88 1.16 1.60 2.93 100

BLCA 9 0.59 37.08 55.34 1.83 1.13 1.78 2.84 100

CANY 20 0.97 32.92 55.93 2.59 1.60 2.93 4.03 100

CARE 9 0.53 49.90 47.20 0.72 0.45 0.54 1.19 100

GRCA 3 0.27 92.31 1.07 1.68 1.03 1.22 2.69 100

GRSA 3 0.27 24.99 69.23 1.46 0.90 1.12 2.30 100

LAGA 5 0.43 22.20 71.74 1.71 1.06 0.56 2.72 100

MABE 0 0.24 24.98 71.07 0.97 0.60 0.87 1.52 100

MEVE 93 2.15 71.14 6.46 5.08 3.13 6.31 7.88 100

PECO 12 0.59 55.50 38.80 1.48 0.91 0.94 2.37 100

PEFO 1 0.25 88.57 6.28 1.34 0.83 0.81 2.17 100

SAPE 35 0.88 28.38 62.72 2.09 1.29 2.27 3.25 100

WEEL 5 0.39 23.21 73.59 0.82 0.50 0.58 1.29 100

WEMI 15 0.65 31.61 64.42 1.01 0.63 0.73 1.61 100

WHPE 4 0.38 24.18 69.77 1.52 0.94 1.18 2.41 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.63 28.93 66.06 2.16 0.56 0.63 1.67 100

BAND 8 0.60 23.30 73.35 1.46 0.38 0.38 1.13 100

BLCA 7 0.44 33.38 64.83 0.79 0.20 0.18 0.62 100

CANY 13 0.78 32.54 60.94 2.78 0.72 0.88 2.14 100

CARE 4 0.35 91.08 1.19 3.35 0.86 0.90 2.61 100

GRCA 0 0.18 52.85 43.67 1.54 0.40 0.32 1.23 100

GRSA 1 0.21 23.53 72.93 1.57 0.41 0.34 1.23 100

LAGA 3 0.32 21.23 74.90 1.79 0.46 0.16 1.47 100

MABE 0 0.18 22.92 75.41 0.73 0.19 0.18 0.57 100

MEVE 63 1.73 44.56 45.24 4.32 1.11 1.44 3.33 100

PECO 5 0.41 52.81 43.33 1.73 0.45 0.31 1.38 100

PEFO 1 0.17 31.86 65.63 1.13 0.29 0.18 0.92 100

SAPE 17 0.69 26.79 68.32 2.10 0.54 0.62 1.62 100

WEEL 1 0.33 23.22 75.05 0.76 0.19 0.19 0.59 100

WEMI 6 0.49 30.25 67.54 0.97 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

WHPE 2 0.28 90.85 5.63 1.59 0.41 0.26 1.24 100

WESP

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.59 24.69 71.73 1.56 0.39 0.45 1.19 100

BAND 8 0.57 19.99 77.67 1.03 0.26 0.27 0.79 100

BLCA 6 0.43 31.77 67.01 0.54 0.14 0.12 0.43 100

CANY 13 0.73 45.13 52.70 0.96 0.24 0.22 0.76 100

CARE 3 0.32 29.23 68.16 1.14 0.29 0.30 0.88 100

GRCA 0 0.17 51.66 45.91 1.08 0.27 0.22 0.86 100

GRSA 1 0.19 20.43 77.08 1.11 0.28 0.24 0.86 100

LAGA 1 0.30 17.42 79.84 1.27 0.32 0.11 1.04 100

MABE 0 0.17 21.31 77.54 0.50 0.13 0.13 0.39 100

MEVE 55 1.56 37.16 55.25 3.24 0.81 1.07 2.47 100

PECO 5 0.39 50.97 46.29 1.23 0.31 0.22 0.97 100

PEFO 1 0.16 72.11 25.23 1.20 0.30 0.21 0.96 100

SAPE 16 0.64 22.14 74.38 1.51 0.38 0.44 1.15 100

WEEL 1 0.32 21.56 77.25 0.52 0.13 0.13 0.41 100

WEMI 4 0.46 19.09 77.05 1.74 0.43 0.33 1.36 100

WHPE 2 0.26 40.37 58.46 0.54 0.13 0.08 0.42 100

03/16/09 1 of 22 

PNM San Juan Generating Station 

Review of Inherent SO3 Removal Scenarios and Sorbent 

Injection for SO3 Removal 

March 16, 2009 

Introduction 

On December 29, 2009, the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) 

requested additional information regarding acid mist (SO3) emissions from Public Service 

of New Mexico (PNM) for the San Juan Generating Station (SJGS) BART analysis. 

After follow up discussions with the NMED in a conference call held on January 14, 

2009, it is PNM’s understanding that NMED requests the following information: 

• A BART visibility modeling analysis for the SCR and Hybrid SNCR/SCR 

systems that shows the effect of inherent removal of SO3 generated from those 

technologies (i.e., SO3 generated from the conversion of SO2 to SO3 across the 

SCR catalyst) at the Class I areas. The inherent removal of SO3 is based on 

the existing air pollution control devices. 

• A BART analysis (engineering and visibility modeling) for the SCR and 

Hybrid SNCR/SCR systems that shows the combined effect of inherent 

removal of SO3 generated from those technologies and the removal of SO3 by 

the installation of sorbent injection control technology. 

The purpose of this report is to provide a summary of engineering information 

which pertains to each of the above scenarios and the resulting class I visibility impacts 

associated with each scenario. 

Review of SO3 Control Technology References Provided by NMED 

 As part of NMED’s review of the PNM BART analyses, NMED reviewed 

technical papers discussing SO3 control for coal-fired power plants. These references 

formed part of the basis for NMED’s request for additional information on SO3 at SJGS. 

The following references were reviewed: 

• Estimating Total Sulfuric Acid Emissions from Stationary Power Plants (EPRI) 

• A System Approach to SO3 Mitigation (B&W) 

• Emissions of Sulfur Trioxide from Coal-Fired Power Plants (Babcock Power) 

• SO3 Impacts on Plant O&M: Part 1 (Power Magazine) 

PNM has reviewed these references and has the following general comments. 
03/16/09 2 of 22 

Amount of SO3 Oxidation. 

SO3 conversion in the SCR catalyst was estimated at 1.0 percent for 3 layers. This 

equates to catalyst conversion of 0.33 percent per layer. A more aggressive conversion 

rate of 0.1 percent was not possible due to the high ash content of the SJGS coal. 

SO3 Removal in Air Heater

Removal of SO3 in the air heater as estimated by each reference is dependent on 

operating the regenerative air heater at a cold-end metal temperature that is below the 

acid dewpoint temperature. Condensation of H2SO4 aerosols will occur at this low 

temperature. The operation of the air heater below the acid dewpoint temperature should 

be avoided at SJGS to prevent corrosion issues from the acid condensation on the air 

heater surfaces and to prevent the formation of ammonium sulfates and ammonium 

bisulfates (with ammonia slip from SCR) that plugs the air heater. Therefore, the 

expected 40 percent removal of SO3 in the air heater as indicated in these references is 

not a desired or plausible method of operation at SJGS. 

SO3 Removal in PJFF

The amount of SO3 removed in the PJFF is dependent on the alkalinity of the fly 

ash. This is because SO3 is adsorbed onto fly ash particles collected in the PJFF, and 

neutralized by the alkaline constituents in the fly ash. Finally, it is removed in the PJFF 

with the collected fly ash. SO3 in the flue gas stream is in a vapor form and will pass 

through the PJFF. For high alkaline (20 to 30 percent by weight) fly ash, a high removal 

of SO3 is expected. However, for low alkaline fly ash such as SJGS (8 percent by 

weight), removal of SO3 in the PJFF will be similar to that for bituminous coal, which is 

a maximum of 40 percent by weight. B&W had predicted an inherent SO3 removal of 50 

percent for the PJFF at SJGS. 

SO3 Removal in FGD

Removal of SO3 in the FGD system is limited by the size of the H2SO4 particles in 

the FGD. At SJGS, only the larger particles will be captured, while sub-micron particles 

will escape the FGD. All the references list an average SO3 removal of 50 percent by the 

FGD system. B&W had predicted an inherent SO3 removal of 40 percent for the FGD at 

SJGS. 

Part 1 - Engineering Impact Analysis 

 As requested by NMED, analyses were performed to determine the amount of 

SO3 emissions that could be inherently removed through the use of existing equipment or 
03/16/09 3 of 22 

air pollution controls at the SJGS or through the installation of additional technologies. 

The following sections briefly discuss the available and technically feasible options, 

control effectiveness, and cost of those options. 

Available and Technically Feasible SO3 Control Technologies

1. Inherent Removal 

Inherent removal is defined as the capture of SO3 from flue gas by the existing 

pollution control equipment installed for SO2 and PM reduction. For SJGS, the existing 

pollution control equipment is the wet limestone SO2 scrubbing system and the PJFF 

(baghouse). The co-benefit removal of SO3 was calculated for the additional SO3

generated from the oxidation of SO2 by the SCR catalyst. The SO3 emission rates for the 

existing pollution control equipments was calculated using the National Park Service 

(NPS) formulas which accounted for inherent removal of the SO3 generated in the boiler 

by the consent decree equipments. 

2. Sorbent Injection SO3 Removal 

Sorbent injection removes SO3 in the flue gas by reaction of the SO3 with an 

alkaline sorbent material to form a particulate that is subsequently removed in a 

particulate control device. The alkaline material injected can be a magnesium-, sodium-, 

and calcium-based sorbent. The injection points for the reagents may vary. For this 

analysis, hydrated lime was selected. For SJGS, hydrated lime is considered to be 

equivalent to other sorbents for removal performance. Attachment 1 shows the design 

concept definition of the sorbent injection system. 

3. Wet Electrostatic Precipitator (WESP) 

A WESP is typically installed downstream of a wet FGD and collects particles 

based on the same principle as a dry ESP; negatively charged particles are collected on 

positively charged collecting surfaces. However, a WESP uses a wet collecting surface 

that is flushed with water. While the WESP is primarily a particulate matter collection 

device, the nature and use of WESP allows sulfuric acid mist (SO3) to condense and be 

collected as particulate or absorbed into the water stream along the charged collection 

surfaces. This co-benefit removal drove the use of a WESP for acid mist collection as 

one of the earliest applications of the ESP technology. 

The BART modeling analysis submitted on August 29, 2008 included WESP as 

an additional PM control device. The analysis included the co-benefit removal of SO3 by 

the WESP. Therefore, the WESP will not be considered again in this analysis. 
03/16/09 4 of 22 

Control Effectiveness

To calculate the inherent control of SO3 produced by the SCR catalyst, B&V 

utilized the performance information provided for the consent decree by B&W. This 

information is shown in Attachment 2 and is based on mass balances that were provided 

as part of the contracts and performance guarantees from B&W. These data indicate an 

expected 50 percent removal in the PJFF and 40 percent removal in the FGD system. It 

should be noted that an error exists in the original reports with regard to the SO2 stack 

outlet emission rates from the Unit 1 & 2 and Units 3 & 4. The SO2 stack outlet emission 

rates from the Unit 1 & 2 and Units 3 & 4 should reflect 550 lb/hr and 860 lb/hr, 

respectively. This data, contained in Attachment 2, has been corrected for this submittal 

to reflect the correct SO2 stack outlet emission rates. 

For the sorbent injection cases, an emission rate of 0.004 lb/MBtu was used. This 

emission rate was determined to be the lowest achieved emission level. This emission 

level is converted to a mass emission rate using the unit heat input rates established in the 

stack outlet conditions in Attachment 3. 

 As stated above, four cases were investigated to determine the engineering impact 

of SO3 control at San Juan Generating Station. The following is a description of each 

scenario (with summary of SO3 emission rates in Table 1) that was evaluated: 

1. Control of SO3 Produced by the SCR through Inherent Controls 

Inherent removal of SO3 generated from the oxidation of SO2 by the SCR catalyst 

by the existing pollution control equipment was calculated. The SO3 emission rate for 

the existing pollution control equipment was calculated using the National Park Service 

(NPS) formulas, which accounted for inherent removal of the SO3 generated in the boiler. 

2. Control of SO3 Produced by the SNCR/SCR Hybrid through Inherent Controls 

Inherent removal of SO3 generated from the oxidation of SO2 by the SNCR/SCR 

Hybrid catalyst by the existing pollution control equipment was calculated. The SO3

emission rate for the existing pollution control equipment was calculated using the 

National Park Service (NPS) formulas, which accounted for inherent removal of the SO3

generated in the boiler. 

3. Control of SO3 Emissions from SCR through Sorbent Injection 

In this scenario, in addition to inherent removal of SO3 by the existing pollution 

control equipment, sorbent injection is also added to further remove SO3 from both the 

boiler and SCR catalyst. 
03/16/09 5 of 22 

 

4. Control of SO3 Emissions from SNCR/SCR Hybrid through Sorbent Injection 

In this scenario, in addition to inherent removal of SO3 by the existing pollution 

control equipment, sorbent injection is also added to remove SO3 from both the boiler 

and SNCR/SCR Hybrid catalyst. 
03/16/09 6 of 22 

Table 1 

Summary of SO3 Emission Rates 

Unit 

Existing 

Pollution Control

Equipment SO3

Outlet 

(lb/hr) 

Additional SO3

from Catalyst 

Conversion 

(lb/hr) 

Stack SO3 Outlet 

(lb/hr)(a)

Inherent Controls on SCR 

SJGS 1 40.50 73.66 62.60 

SJGS 2 40.30 73.66 62.29 

SJGS 3 62.90 114.42 97.22 

SJGS 4 61.70 112.25 95.37 

Inherent Controls on SNCR/SCR Hybrid 

SJGS 1 40.50 73.66 62.60 

SJGS 2 40.30 73.66 62.29 

SJGS 3 62.90 114.42 97.22 

SJGS 4 61.70 112.25 95.37 

Control of SO3 from SCR Catalyst Conversion Using Sorbent Injection 

SJGS 1 40.50 73.66 16.09 

SJGS 2 40.30 73.66 16.01 

SJGS 3 62.90 114.42 24.99 

SJGS 4 61.70 112.25 24.52 

Control of SO3 from SNCR/SCR Hybrid Catalyst Conversion Using Sorbent 

Injection 

SJGS 1 40.50 73.66 16.09 

SJGS 2 40.30 73.66 16.01 

SJGS 3 62.90 114.42 24.99 

SJGS 4 61.70 112.25 24.52 

(a) Stack SO3 outlet emission rate considers additional control of this 

pollutant through inherent control or inherent control and sorbent injection. 
03/16/09 7 of 22 

Cost Effectiveness

Attachment 4 shows the detailed cost estimate development for the sorbent 

injection system. Table 1 in Attachment 5 shows the cost effectiveness of SO3 controls 

for the SCR and SCR/SNCR Hybrid. The cost effectiveness values shown in the table 

are in dollars per ton of SO3 removed. 

Part 2 – Visibility Analysis 

Subsequent to the June 6, 2007 submittal, PNM further investigated additional 

refinements to the BART CALPUFF air dispersion modeling analyses which included 

nitrate repartitioning and more realistic ammonia background concentrations based on 

monitored values at several western Class I areas. These additional modeling options are 

considered more realistic and therefore will again form the basis of this analysis. 

To date, PNM has previously submitted five BART modeling analyses in addition 

to the SO3 analysis being submitted coincident as part of this analysis. A summary of 

each analysis is provided below: 

June 6, 2007

Modeling analyses were performed to provide SJGS plant-wide regional haze 

(visibility) impacts at 16 Class I areas. The analyses were based on a constant 1 

ppb background ammonia concentration and no nitrate repartitioning. The NOx 

control technologies analyzed were the Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) and 

SNCR/SCR Hybrid. 

November 6, 2007

Modeling analysis were performed to provide SJGS plant-wide regional haze 

(visibility) impacts at 16 Class I areas. The analyses were based on refinements 

which included using the nitrate repartitioning methodology and monthly variable 

background ammonia concentrations. Again, the NOx control technologies 

analyzed were the SCR and SNCR/SCR Hybrid. 

March 31, 2008

Two main modeling analyses were performed to provide SJGS plant-wide and 

unit specific regional haze (visibility) impacts at 16 Class I areas for the SCR NOx

control technology only. One of the analyses, believed to be the more 

representative of ammonia chemistry of the area, was based on the November 6, 
03/16/09 8 of 22 

2007 refinements which included using the nitrate repartitioning methodology and 

monthly variable background ammonia concentrations. The other analyses 

included nitrate repartitioning and a constant background ammonia concentration 

as requested by the NMED. 

May 30, 2008

Two modeling analyses were performed to provide SJGS plant-wide and unit 

specific regional haze (visibility) impacts at 16 Class I areas for the SNCR NOx 

control technology only. Similar to the March 31, 2008 analyses, one of the 

analyses was based on the November 6, 2007 refinements that included using the 

nitrate repartitioning methodology and monthly variable background ammonia 

concentrations. The other analyses included nitrate repartitioning and a constant 

background ammonia concentration. It should be noted that all vendors of SNCR 

(including Fuel Tech and Nalco Mobotec) have been modeled together as one 

technology called SNCR. This is the same approach that is used for modeling 

SCR control technology, where all vendors are modeled generically as SCR. 

August 29, 2008

Three modeling analyses were performed to provide SJGS plant-wide and unit 

specific regional haze (visibility) impacts at 16 Class I areas for the ROFA with 

Rotamix, Rotamix, and ROFA NOx and WESP PM control technologies (the NOx

and PM analyses were submitted separately). Similar to the May 30, 2008 

analyses, these analyses were also based on the November 6, 2007 refinements 

that included using the nitrate repartitioning methodology and monthly variable 

background ammonia concentrations. 

March 16, 2009

Four modeling analyses were performed to provide SJGS plant-wide and unit 

specific regional haze (visibility) impacts at 16 Class I areas. These include the 

following: 

• SCR technology with inherent SO3 removal of the SO3 formed from the 

catalyst oxidation of SO2 to SO3. 

• SCR/SNCR hybrid technology with inherent SO3 removal of the SO3

formed from the catalyst oxidation of SO2 to SO3. 

• SCR technology with inherent SO3 removal of the SO3 formed from the 

catalyst oxidation of SO2 to SO3 and sorbent injection. 
03/16/09 9 of 22 

• SCR/SNCR hybrid technology with inherent SO3 removal of the SO3

formed from the catalyst oxidation of SO2 to SO3 and sorbent injection. 

Similar to the August 29, 2008 analyses, these analyses were also based on the 

November 6, 2007 refinements which included using the nitrate repartitioning 

methodology and monthly variable background ammonia concentrations. 

Visibility Summary

 Based on the refined methodology consisting of representative background 

ammonia concentrations and nitrate repartitioning, revised CALPUFF visibility modeling 

was performed for four cases; SCR (inherent control), SCR/SNCR Hybrid (inherent 

control), SCR (inherent and sorbent control), SCR/SNCR Hybrid (inherent and sorbent 

control) technology scenarios. The modeling summarized in this report is for the SJGS on 

a plant-wide basis and for each of the four SJGS units on an individual unit basis. It is 

important to note that all other modeling options as described in the BART application 

were unchanged. For simplicity, the following results discuss the differences between the 

consent decree scenario and the control technology scenarios. 

The stack outlet conditions for the control technology scenarios are included in 

Attachment 3. These tables reflect the information from the previous submittal and have 

not been modified to illustrate the changing stack outlet SO3 emissions indicated in Table 

1 above. Attachment 6 includes both the facility and a unit specific summary of the 98th 

percentile visibility impact for the modeled scenarios, the number of days above 0.5 dv 

threshold, and the contribution of each pollutant associated with the 98th percentile 

visibility impact for each Class I area. 

 Additionally, a minor discrepancy was discovered in the previously submitted 

visibility modeling results for the SCR NOx control technology scenario. Specifically, 

the NOx stack outlet emission rate was correctly reflected in the stack outlet summary 

tables (based on 0.07 lb/MBtu) but the initial modeling reflected an incorrect NOx stack 

outlet emission rate for each unit based on 0.06 lb/MBtu. This discrepancy was 

corrected, and the results reflected within the information contained in Tables 2 and 3 of 

this submittal. Two important points must be clarified with regard to this issue. First, as 

discussed in previous submittals, the NOx emission rate of 0.07 lb/MBtu is the 

appropriate emission rate for retrofitted SCR technologies at SJGS as reviewed in the 

BART analyses and not the 0.06 lb/MBtu NOx emission level. Secondly, as can be seen 

from the resulting visibility impacts for the SCR control scenarios for the NOx emission 

rate of 0.07 lb/MBtu (Tables 2 & 3 below), the maximum visibility modeling results 

(over the period 2001 to 2003) are mostly unchanged for each Class I area if compared to 

previously submitted results for the same scenario. Thus, as described in previous 
03/16/09 10 of 22 

submittals and reiterated later in this document, the visibility degradation by sulfur 

emissions is more pronounced than from emissions of NOx. 

SJGS Facility Visibility Summary with SCR or SCR/SNCR Hybrid Utilizing 

Inherent Controls on the SO3 Generated from the Catalyst

The results of the refined visibility modeling for the SJGS plant, assuming the 

same level of inherent control for all four units for each technology scenario, are 

illustrated in Tables 1-4 and 21-24 of Attachment 6. These tables summarize the 

scenarios and the maximum visibility (deciview) impact seen at any of the 16 Class I 

areas at any time over the 2001 to 2003 period. The results of this analysis, using the 

aforementioned refinements, indicates a minimal improvement in visibility impact (less 

than 0.5 dv) at each of the 16 Class I areas when compared to the baseline (consent 

decree) scenario. It should be noted that there was one instance in which the result 

exceeded the 0.5 dv threshold by 0.04 dv for the Capital Reef Class I area which is not 

located in New Mexico.

 The maximum visibility (deciview) improvement seen at any of the 16 Class I 

areas at any time over the 2001 to 2003 period is illustrated in Tables 4 and 24 of 

Attachment 6 for each scenario. The expected degree of visibility improvement for each 

unit (on a plant-wide basis) was determined by the difference in the maximum visibility 

improvement for each receptor at each of the sixteen Class I areas. Again, it is important 

to note that the control technology associated with the consent decree formulated the 

SJGS’s baseline case, as well as the baseline case for the individual unit analyses 

described later. Additionally, the cost-effectiveness for the potential BART control 

technologies from the BART application were used to calculate visibility improvement 

cost-effectiveness in $/deciview ($/dv). Three major scenarios are shown in the 

visibility improvement cost effectiveness summary in Tables 4 and 24 of Attachment 6 

for each control technology: 

• Pre-consent decree to consent decree. 

• Consent decree to additional NOx control technology alternative scenarios 

including inherent removal of SO3. 

• Pre-consent decree to additional NOx control technology alternative scenarios 

including inherent removal of SO3. 

These maximum visibility improvements between the consent decree and the two 

NOx control technology scenarios (SCR and SCR/SNCR Hybrid) with inherent SO3

removal considered range from showing no improvement (i.e., visibility degradation at 
03/16/09 11 of 22 

Mesa Verde) at all to 0.54 dv of expected visibility improvement above the consent 

decree scenario. The visibility improvements for each of theses options are summarized 

below: 

• Facility improvements with SCR and inherent SO3 removal range from no 

improvement to 0.54 dv. 

• Facility improvements with Hybrid and inherent SO3 removal range from no 

improvement to 0.23 dv. 

The results indicate that adding additional NOx control technology beyond the 

consent decree and including consideration of inherent SO3 removal through existing 

control technologies only results in one class I area visibility improvement greater than 

0.5 dv and visibility degradation at Mesa Verde. 

Based on the visibility improvement modeled and the total annual cost evaluated 

in the impact analysis stage of the BART application document, the cost-effectiveness for 

visibility improvement (annual cost per improvement in visibility, $/dv), was determined 

for SJGS over the aforementioned range of visibility improvement. The resulting cost for 

installation of either SCR or SCR/SNCR Hybrid NOx control technology for all four units 

ranges from $1.2 billion/dv to $180 million/dv (excluding the scenarios where there was 

visibility degradation). The visibility improvements for each of the control technology 

options with inherent control are summarized below: 

• SCR range from $487 million/dv to $180 million/dv. 

• SCR/SNCR Hybrid range from $1.2 billion/dv to $365 million/dv. 
03/16/09 12 of 22 

Unit Specific Visibility Summary with SCR or SCR/SNCR Hybrid Utilizing 

Inherent Controls on the SO3 Generated from the Catalyst 

The results of the refined visibility modeling for Unit 1, Unit 2, Unit 3, and Unit 4 for the 

two control technologies utilizing inherent control assumptions are illustrated in Tables 

5-20 and 25-40 of Attachment 6, respectively. These tables summarize the scenarios and 

the maximum visibility (deciview) impact seen at any of the 16 Class I areas at any time 

over the 2001 to 2003 period. Similar to results seen for the SJGS facility, the visibility 

impacts of individual units at Class I areas outside of New Mexico represent the 

maximum visibility impact at any of the 16 Class I areas. In addition, this analysis 

indicates a minimal improvement in visibility impact (less than 0.5 dv) at each of the 16 

Class I areas when compared to the baseline (consent decree) scenario. 

The maximum visibility (deciview) improvement seen at any of the 16 Class I 

areas at any time over the 2001 to 2003 period are illustrated for these two technologies 

in Tables 8, 12, 16, 20, and 28, 32, 36, 40 of Attachment 6. Again, the expected degree 

of visibility improvement for each control scenario for each unit was determined by the 

difference between the consent decree’s maximum visibility improvement for each 

receptor at each of the sixteen Class I areas and the specific NOx control technology (with 

inherent SO3 removal considered) scenario’s maximum visibility improvement for each 

receptor at each of the sixteen Class I areas. Furthermore, the same methodology 

previously described for the SJGS’s cost-effectiveness in ($/dv) was used here for each 

unit. 

These maximum visibility improvements between the consent decree and the NOx

control scenario for each unit are similar to that of the combined SJGS. The visibility 

improvements for each scenario are summarized below. 

SCR with Inherent SO3 Removal

• Unit 1 improvements range from 0.04 dv to 0.42 dv. 

• Unit 2 improvements range from 0.04 dv to 0.41 dv 

• Unit 3 improvements range from 0.08 dv to 0.44 dv 

• Unit 4 improvements range from 0.08 dv to 0.44 dv 

SCR/SNCR Hybrid with Inherent SO3 Removal

• Unit 1 improvements range from 0.01 dv to 0.21 dv. 

• Unit 2 improvements range from 0.01 dv to 0.20 dv 

• Unit 3 improvements range from 0.04 dv to 0.23 dv 

• Unit 4 improvements range from 0.03 dv to 0.22 dv 
03/16/09 13 of 22 

The results again indicate that adding additional NOx control technology beyond 

the consent decree consisting of either SCR or SCR/SNCR Hybrid and considering 

inherent removal of SO3 does not yield visibility improvement greater than 0.5 dv at any 

Class I area. Based on the visibility improvement modeled and the total annual cost 

evaluated in the impact analysis stage of the BART application document, the costeffectiveness for visibility improvement (annual cost per improvement in visibility, $/dv), 

was determined for each unit for each Class I area. The resulting cost for installation of 

additional control technology for each unit is summarized below. 

SCR with Inherent SO3 Removal

• Unit 1 cost range is $489 million/dv to $49 million/dv. 

• Unit 2 cost range is $509 million/dv to $53 million/dv. 

• Unit 3 cost range is $338 million/dv to $65 million/dv. 

• Unit 4 cost range is $341 million/dv to $60 million/dv. 

SCR/SNCR Hybrid with Inherent SO3 Removal

• Unit 1 cost range is $1.2 billion/dv to $78 million/dv. 

• Unit 2 cost range is $1.2 billion/dv to $83 million/dv. 

• Unit 3 cost range is $732 million/dv to $111 million/dv. 

• Unit 4 cost range is $802 million/dv to $111 million/dv. 

SJGS Facility Visibility Summary with SCR Inherent Controls and Sorbent 

Injection

The results of the refined visibility modeling for the SJGS plant, assuming the 

same sorbent control technology and resulting stack emission rate for all four units, are 

illustrated in Tables 41-44 of Attachment 6. These tables summarize the scenarios and 

the maximum visibility (deciview) impact seen at any of the 16 Class I areas at any time 

over the 2001 to 2003 period. The results of this analysis, using the aforementioned 

refinements, indicates an improvement in visibility at each of the 16 Class I areas when 

compared to the baseline (consent decree) scenario or above any of the previously 

considered SCR control technology scenarios. The highest visibility improvement was at 

Mesa Verde at 1.34 dv.

 The maximum visibility (deciview) improvement seen at any of the 16 Class I 

areas at any time over the 2001 to 2003 period is illustrated in Table 44 for each scenario. 

The expected degree of visibility improvement for each unit (on a plant-wide basis) was 

determined by the difference in the maximum visibility improvement for each receptor at 

each of the sixteen Class I areas. Again, it is important to note that the control 
03/16/09 14 of 22 

technology associated with the consent decree formulated the SJGS’s baseline case, as 

well as the baseline case for the individual unit analyses described later. Additionally, 

the cost-effectiveness for the potential BART control technologies from the BART 

application were used as the basis and the costs of the sorbent injection technology was 

added (refer to Part 1 above) to calculate visibility improvement cost-effectiveness in 

$/deciview ($/dv). Three major scenarios are shown in the visibility improvement cost 

effectiveness summary in Table 44 for this control technology: 

• Pre-consent decree to consent decree. 

• Consent decree to SCR NOx control technology with sorbent/inherent controls. 

• Pre-consent decree to SCR NOx control technology with sorbent/inherent 

controls. 

These maximum visibility improvements between the consent decree and this 

control technology scenarios range from 0.28 dv to 1.34 dv of expected visibility 

improvement above the consent decree scenario. The results indicate that adding 

additional SO3 control in the form of sorbent injection to the NOx control technology can 

yield visibility improvement greater than 0.5 dv at several Class I areas. 

Based on the visibility improvement modeled and the total annual cost evaluated 

as noted above, the cost-effectiveness for visibility improvement (annual cost per 

improvement in visibility, $/dv), was determined for SJGS over the aforementioned range 

of visibility improvement. The resulting cost for installation of SCR NOx control 

technology and sorbent injection for all four units ranges from $374 million/dv to $78 

million/dv. 

Unit Specific Visibility Summary with SCR Inherent Controls and Sorbent 

Injection

The results of the refined visibility modeling for Unit 1, Unit 2, Unit 3, and Unit 4 

are illustrated in Tables 45-60 of Attachment 6. These tables summarize the scenarios 

and the maximum visibility (deciview) impact seen at any of the 16 Class I areas at any 

time over the 2001 to 2003 period. Similar to results seen for the SJGS facility, the 

visibility impacts at Mesa Verde, represent the maximum visibility impact at any of the 

16 Class I areas. 

The maximum visibility (deciview) improvement seen at any of the 16 Class I 

areas at any time over the 2001 to 2003 period is illustrated in Tables 48, 52, 56, and 60. 

Again, the expected degree of visibility improvement for each control scenario for each 

unit was determined by the difference between the consent decree’s maximum visibility 
03/16/09 15 of 22 

improvement for each receptor at each of the sixteen Class I areas and the specific control 

technology scenario’s maximum visibility improvement for each receptor at each of the 

sixteen Class areas. Furthermore, the same methodology previously described for the 

SJGS’s cost-effectiveness in ($/dv) was used here for each unit. 

These maximum visibility improvements between the consent decree and the SCR 

and Sorbent/Inherent control scenario for each unit are summarized below. 

• Unit 1 improvements range from 0.06 dv to 0.67 dv. 

• Unit 2 improvements range from 0.06 dv to 0.68 dv 

• Unit 3 improvements range from 0.11 dv to 0.89 dv 

• Unit 4 improvements range from 0.11 dv to 0.90 dv 

Based on the visibility improvement modeled and the total annual cost evaluated 

as noted above, the cost-effectiveness for visibility improvement (annual cost per 

improvement in visibility, $/dv), was determined for SJGS over the aforementioned range 

of visibility improvement. The resulting cost for installation of additional control 

technology consisting of SCR and sorbent injection for each unit is summarized below. 

• Unit 1 cost range is $355 million/dv to $33 million/dv. 

• Unit 2 cost range is $377 million/dv to $34 million/dv. 

• Unit 3 cost range is $280 million/dv to $34 million/dv. 

• Unit 4 cost range is $271 million/dv to $32 million/dv. 
03/16/09 16 of 22 

SJGS Facility Visibility Summary with SCR/SCNR Hybrid, Inherent Controls, and 

Sorbent Injection

The results of the refined visibility modeling for the SJGS plant, assuming the 

same sorbent control technology and resulting stack emission rate for all four units, are 

illustrated in Tables 61-64 of Attachment 6. These tables summarize the scenarios and 

the maximum visibility (deciview) impact seen at any of the 16 Class I areas at any time 

over the 2001 to 2003 period. The results of this analysis, using the aforementioned 

refinements, indicates an improvement in visibility at each of the 16 Class I areas when 

compared to the baseline (consent decree) scenario or above any of the previously 

considered SCR/SNCR Hybrid control technology scenarios. The highest visibility 

improvement was at Mesa Verde at 0.96 dv.

 The maximum visibility (deciview) improvement seen at any of the 16 Class I 

areas at any time over the 2001 to 2003 period is illustrated in Table 64 for each scenario. 

The expected degree of visibility improvement for each unit (on a plant-wide basis) was 

determined by the difference in the maximum visibility improvement for each receptor at 

each of the sixteen Class I areas. Again, it is important to note that the control 

technology associated with the consent decree formulated the SJGS’s baseline case, as 

well as the baseline case for the individual unit analyses described later. Additionally, 

the cost-effectiveness for the potential BART control technologies from the BART 

application were used as the basis and the costs of the sorbent injection technology was 

added (refer to Part 1 above) to calculate visibility improvement cost-effectiveness in 

$/deciview ($/dv). Three major scenarios are shown in the visibility improvement cost 

effectiveness summary in Table 64 for this control technology: 

• Pre-consent decree to consent decree. 

• Consent decree to SCR NOx control technology with sorbent/inherent controls. 

• Pre-consent decree to SCR NOx control technology with sorbent/inherent 

controls. 

These maximum visibility improvements between the consent decree and this 

control technology scenarios range from 0.15 dv to 0.96 dv of expected visibility 

improvement above the consent decree scenario. The results indicate that adding 

additional SO3 control in the form of sorbent injection to the NOx control technology can 

yield visibility improvement greater than 0.5 dv at several Class I areas. 

Based on the visibility improvement modeled and the total annual cost evaluated 

as noted above, the cost-effectiveness for visibility improvement (annual cost per 

improvement in visibility, $/dv), was determined for SJGS over the aforementioned range 
03/16/09 17 of 22 

of visibility improvement. The resulting cost for installation of SCR NOx control 

technology and sorbent injection for all four units ranges from $592 million/dv to $94 

million/dv. 

Unit Specific Visibility Summary with SCR/SCNR Hybrid, Inherent Controls, and 

Sorbent Injection 

The results of the refined visibility modeling for Unit 1, Unit 2, Unit 3, and Unit 4 

are illustrated in Tables 65-80 of Attachment 6. These tables summarize the scenarios 

and the maximum visibility (deciview) impact seen at any of the 16 Class I areas at any 

time over the 2001 to 2003 period. Similar to results seen for the SJGS facility, the 

visibility impacts at Mesa Verde, represent the maximum visibility impact at any of the 

16 Class I areas. 

The maximum visibility (deciview) improvement seen at any of the 16 Class I 

areas at any time over the 2001 to 2003 period is illustrated in Tables 68, 72, 76, and 80. 

Again, the expected degree of visibility improvement for each control scenario for each 

unit was determined by the difference between the consent decree’s maximum visibility 

improvement for each receptor at each of the sixteen Class I areas and the specific control 

technology scenario’s maximum visibility improvement for each receptor at each of the 

sixteen Class areas. Furthermore, the same methodology previously described for the 

SJGS’s cost-effectiveness in ($/dv) was used here for each unit. 

These maximum visibility improvements between the consent decree and the SCR 

and Sorbent/Inherent control scenario for each unit are summarized below. 

• Unit 1 improvements range from 0.03 dv to 0.41 dv. 

• Unit 2 improvements range from 0.03 dv to 0.41 dv 

• Unit 3 improvements range from 0.06 dv to 0.59 dv 

• Unit 4 improvements range from 0.06 dv to 0.60 dv 

Based on the visibility improvement modeled and the total annual cost evaluated 

as noted above, the cost-effectiveness for visibility improvement (annual cost per 

improvement in visibility, $/dv), was determined for SJGS over the aforementioned range 

of visibility improvement. The resulting cost for installation of additional control 

technology consisting of SCR and sorbent injection for each unit is summarized below. 

• Unit 1 cost range is $570 million/dv to $43 million/dv. 

• Unit 2 cost range is $567 million/dv to $44 million/dv. 

• Unit 3 cost range is $434 million/dv to $47 million/dv. 
03/16/09 18 of 22 

• Unit 4 cost range is $458 million/dv to $45 million/dv. 

Additional Considerations

As discussed in previous submittals, the visibility results imply that visibility is 

influenced more by the SJGS’s sulfur emissions (both primary SO2 and additional SO3

from the catalysts on the NOx control devices) than by the reduction of NOx by itself. To 

illustrate this, Tables 2 and 3 compare the results of SJGS’s SCR and SCR/SNCR Hybrid 

control technology scenario to the results of the SCR and SCR/SNCR Hybrid utilizing 

sorbent/inherent controls for the class I areas. The results of this comparison indicate that 

the by adding sorbent injection and including consideration for additional inherent 

controls to reduce SO3 emissions, the visibility improvements realized are approximately 

twice (or more) what they were with SCR with inherent control of the SO3 formed from 

the SCR catalyst or SCR/SNCR Hybrid with inherent control of the SO3 formed from the 

SCR catalyst alone. 

Thus, the visibility results realized by including the sorbent injection and inherent 

removal of SO3 emissions, which for the most part have been created due to the oxidation 

of SO2 to SO3 across the catalyst of the SCR, further substantiates that the visibility 

issues in the area are caused by sulfur emissions and not by emissions of NOx from SJGS. 

Part 1 of this document indicated the low cost of the sorbent injection technology which 

are a fraction of the costs of the NOx control equipment. While this analysis reviews 

sorbent injection technology and it’s potential for visibility improvement beyond the SCR 

and SCR/SNCR Hybrid NOx control equipment by itself, it must be clearly noted that 

NOx control equipment have minimal visibility improvement by themselves. Therefore, 

the minimal visibility improvements discussed in detail in previous submittals and 

reiterated in this document for the NOx control equipment do not merit the large capital 

expenditure required for installation of either SCR or SCR/SNCR Hybrid control 

technology. 
03/16/09 19 of 22 

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv)

(98th Percentile, see Note 1) Maximum Visibility Results

Class 1 Area Consent Decree SCR SCR w/sorbent

Consent Decree 

to SCR

Consent Decree 

to SCR w/sorbent

Arches 1.69 1.72 1.10 NI 0.59

Bandelier 1.56 1.33 0.80 0.23 0.75

Black Canyon 1.15 0.93 0.63 0.22 0.52

Canyonlands 2.26 2.40 1.59 NI 0.67

Capitol Reef 1.81 1.43 1.08 0.37 0.73

Grand Canyon 0.97 0.74 0.53 0.23 0.44

Great Sand Dunes 0.71 0.58 0.40 0.13 0.31

La Garita 0.94 0.72 0.45 0.22 0.49

Maroon Bells 0.56 0.43 0.28 0.13 0.28

Mesa Verde 3.80 6.00 2.46 NI 1.34

Pecos 1.09 1.00 0.66 0.09 0.43

Petrified Forest 0.82 0.74 0.48 0.08 0.34

San Pedro 2.01 2.07 1.13 NI 0.88

West Elk 0.91 0.68 0.43 0.24 0.49

Weminuche 1.48 1.64 0.90 NI 0.59

Wheeler Peak 0.89 0.71 0.50 0.19 0.40

Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data.

2. NI = No Improvement

Table 2

SJGS Facility Visibility Improvement Comparison

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning
03/16/09 20 of 22 

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv)

(98th Percentile, see Note 1) Maximum Visibility Results

Class 1 Area Consent Decree Hybrid Hybrid w/sorbent

Consent Decree 

to Hybrid

Consent Decree 

to hybrid 

w/sorbent

Arches 1.69 1.75 1.41 NI 0.28

Bandelier 1.56 1.52 1.11 0.04 0.45

Black Canyon 1.15 1.06 0.87 0.09 0.28

Canyonlands 2.26 2.41 1.95 NI 0.31

Capitol Reef 1.81 1.67 1.43 0.14 0.38

Grand Canyon 0.97 0.87 0.72 0.10 0.25

Great Sand Dunes 0.71 0.72 0.55 NI 0.16

La Garita 0.94 0.85 0.63 0.09 0.32

Maroon Bells 0.56 0.55 0.41 0.01 0.15

Mesa Verde 3.80 5.55 2.83 NI 0.96

Pecos 1.09 1.01 0.82 0.08 0.28

Petrified Forest 0.82 0.79 0.65 0.03 0.17

San Pedro 2.01 2.14 1.47 NI 0.55

West Elk 0.91 0.80 0.61 0.11 0.31

Weminuche 1.48 1.72 1.13 NI 0.36

Wheeler Peak 0.89 0.84 0.63 0.05 0.27

Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data.

2. NI = No Improvement

Table 3

SJGS Facility Visibility Improvement Comparison

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning
03/16/09 21 of 22 

In addition to the prohibitive cost associated with SCR or SCR/SNCR Hybrid 

control technology, there are other important reasons that LNB, OFA and NN should be 

considered BART for the SJGS units. First, the LNB, OFA and NN systems just installed 

to meet the consent decree are state-of-the-art combustion controls. State-of-the-art 

combustion controls comprising of LNB, OFA and NN technologies were used to form 

the basis for the BART presumptive limits for NOx in the BART guidelines. Second, 

installation of SCR or SCR/SNCR Hybrid control technology requires ammonia to 

reduce NOx emissions. Specifically, in a SCR system, ammonia is injected into the flue 

gas stream just upstream of a catalytic reactor. The ammonia molecules in the presence 

of the catalyst dissociate NOx into nitrogen and water. Any unreacted ammonia passes 

through the reactor and out the stack as ammonia emissions or ammonia slip. This 

additional ammonia would then be available to add to the ammonia background 

concentration, chemically react to form nitrates and sulfates, and potentially further 

increase the visibility impacts at the Class I areas. The additional ammonia slip was not 

considered in this analysis. Finally, sulfur emissions (i.e., SO2, H2S, TRS, H2SO4, and/or 

SO3) are not subject to BART requirements because New Mexico participates in the 

WRAP emissions trading program. Therefore, LNB, OFA and NN should be considered 

BART for NOx control on the SJGS units. 

Conclusion

As noted in this document, PNM’s further investigation of sorbent injection 

control technology to control the additional SO3 emissions from the SCR or SCR/SNCR 

Hybrid NOx control technologies does yield an improvement in visibility at local Class I 

areas. However, the addition of this technology is solely to mitigate SO3 emissions 

created from the oxidation of SO2 across the catalyst of the SCR or SCR/SNCR Hybrid 

NOx control technologies. These technologies by themselves have been shown to have 

minimal improvement in visibility (less than 0.5 dv) at each of the 16 Class I areas when 

compared to the baseline (consent decree) scenario. 

The conclusion of this study re-iterate and support the overall findings of the 

previous reports that installation of SCR or SCR/SNCR Hybrid NOx control technologies 

at the SJGS provide minimal visibility improvements by themselves and would require 

significant capital expenditure and modifications that will impact many areas of the plant 

including boiler draft systems, air heater performance, SO3 emissions, and ash handling. 

The results from the analyses further substantiate that the addition of SCR or SCR/SNCR 

Hybrid NOx control technologies does not yield a benefit nor meet the intended goal of 

BART. Specifically, these analyses indicate: 
03/16/09 22 of 22 

• The addition of SCR or SCR/SNCR Hybrid technology with inherent removal on 

a plant-wide basis shows only one instance of an improvement greater than 0.5 dv 

(Capital Reef Class I area at 0.54 dv). All other Class I areas show less than a 0.5 

dv improvement for all Class I areas including the four Class I areas located in 

New Mexico. In fact, the plant wide analyses with inherent removal have shown 

continued visibility degradation at Mesa Verde. Individual unit analyses have 

shown visibility improvements less than 0.5 dv at all Class I areas. 

• Any visibility improvement illustrated at a class I areas greater than 0.5 dv due to 

the installation of sorbent injection should not be considered a solution. Instead, 

it should be realized that the consideration of sorbent injection is to mitigate the 

secondary pollutant affect of the SCR or SCR/SNCR Hybrid technology. 

• Both the total annual costs evaluated and the cost-effectiveness ($/dv) are 

prohibitive given the minimal improvements realized. 

Therefore, as previously noted, given the overall cost of the SCR or SCR/SNCR 

Hybrid technology and minimal visibility improvements for these technologies by 

themselves, the recommended BART control for SJGS is LNB, OFA, and a NN for NOx

control and PJFF for PM control. 

 
Attachment 1 
Design Concept Definition 

Site Name San Juan Generating Station Units 1, 2, 3, 4 

Client Name PNM Process Technology SO3 Sorbent Injection 

Process Description Injection of alkaline sorbent downstream of air heater into ductwork leading into PJFF to neutralize SO3 in flue gas. 

Pollutant SO3 (Unit 1) SO3 (Unit 2) SO3 (Unit 3) SO3 (Unit 4) 

Emissions 

 lb/MBtu 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 

 lb/h 40.5 40.3 62.9 61.7 

Controlled Emissions 

 lb/MBtu 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 

 lb/h 16 16 25 25 

Inlet Flow Basis, acfm 1,518,669 1,517,269 2,267,380 2,224,459 

Pressure Drop Added, in. wg None 

Coal Source and Type New Mexico, Subbituminous 

Capacity Factor 85.0% 

Consumables Sorbent (Hydrated Lime), lb/h 233 233 344 344 

Energy, kW 160 160 160 160 

Maintenance 3% of direct material cost. 

Byproduct Description No impact on ash sales. 

Other None. 

Location of Major Process Equipment One complete system train per unit. Air blower skid and sorbent storage tank at grade with

truck unloading station. A secondary short term storage silo to be located close to injection 

location. Injection lances location at air heater outlet to be determined by modeling results. 

Inlet/Outlet Connections and Interconnecting Ducts No ductwork connections. Injectors added into existing ductwork. 

Reagent Storage Long term (7 days) and short term (8 hours) sorbent storage silo for each system train. Truck 

unloading system included with each system train. 

Control System Modifications Sorbent injection PLC based control system interfaced into existing plant control system. 

Fan Modifications None. 

Power Supply/Aux Power Modifications Minimum impact/modifications. 

Enclosures Requirements Enclosure for air blower. 

Demolition or Relocation Requirements Demolition of ductwork walls required for installation of injection lances. 

Major Constructability Issues None expected. 

Significant Issues or Challenges Additional loading in particulate collection device. However, the level of additional loading is 

very minimal. Planned outage required for retrofit project. 

Other Assumptions: 

• No major impact in plant availability. 

• The site has sufficient area available to accommodate construction activities including, but not limited to, offices, laydown, and staging. 

• Positive impacts on fly ash quality since lime content increases the quality of pozzolanic and cementious properties. 

State of Availability Available. 

State of Applicability Applicable. 

Technical Feasibility Technically feasible. 
Attachment 2 
Public Service Company of New Mexico November 21, 2006 

San Juan Generating Station – Units 1 & 2 

4.0 DESIGN CRITERIA 

Proposal No.: P-007590 Section 4 

Contract No.: 0635-169E (#1); 0635-169F (#2) Page 7 of 8

B&W PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL Babcock & Wilcox 

Copyright © 2006 Babcock & Wilcox Company a McDermott Company All right reserved

4.4 PNM SAN JUAN GENERATING STATION UNITS 1 & 2 FLUE GAS MASS BALANCE 

Boiler Heat Input 3,461 mmBTU/hrFuelFuel Sulfur 0.76 wt. %HHV 9,502 BTU/lbAsh 21.78 wt. %Description Units 1 2 3 4

Powdered 

Activated 

Carbon (4 

lbs/MMACF)

Ash Solids From 

Existing Ash 

Conveying 

System

Ash Solids 

From PJFF Ash 

Handling 

System

Ash Solids to 

Disposal

Total Mass Flow lb/hr 350 39,668 39,668 79,686Bulk Density lb/ft3 26.5 45 45 45

Volumetric Flow ft3/hr 13 882 882 1,771

Description Units A B C D 

Flue Gas from 

Air Heaters

Flue Gas to 

Baghouse (PJFF)

Flue Gas from 

Baghouse 

(PJFF)

Flue Gas From 

Booster Fans

Flue G

Absor

to 

Total Mass Flow (w/ solids) lb/hr 3,875,397 3,875,747 3,874,104 3,874,104 4,0Temperature °F 279 279 279 296 

Flue Gas Pressure (expected) in.wg. -1.2 -4.3 -14.3 8.5 

Molecular Weight (wet) lb/lbmol 29.35 29.35 29.34 29.34 2

Volumetric Flow (w/o Solids) ACFM 1,444,500 1,458,200 1,519,500 1,450,100 1,22

CO2 lb/hr 723,540 723,540 723,540 723,540 72

H2O lb/hr 211,104 211,104 211,662 211,662 39

SO2 lb/hr 5,481 5,481 5,481 5,481 

N2 lb/hr 2,693,225 2,693,225 2,722,242 2,722,242 2,73

O2 lb/hr 202,200 202,200 210,983 210,983 21HCl lb/hr 129 129 129 129 

Ash + PAC lb/hr 39,668 40,018 42 42 HF lb/hr 0 0 0 0 SO3 lb/hr 50 50 25 25 

Operating Conditions:

Design Coal

Notes:  1. Reference Schematic, Flue Gas Mass Balance Diagram, in Section 10.0 for stream cross references.  2. Performance Conditions - 99% eff., 0% Bypass, 35% Open Absorber Tray Area, 2,700 ppm DBA, 4 lbs PAC/mmACF, 50%  20% Excess Air, 10% Air Heater Leakage, and 1% PJFF Leakage; Note: the above does not include margins required for b
Public Service Company of New Mexico 

San Juan Environmental Project Design Criteria 

Project No.: 11922-010 Revision: 1 Date: April 3, 2007 

8 

\\Snl1b\data2\SanJuan\11922 B&W CLIENT ENVIR MODS\6.0 Evaluation Reports\6.02 Design Criteria\SJGS Environmental Project Design Criteria_Rev 0_04-03-07 sof.doc

3.4 Design Flue Gas Mass Balance 3.4.1 Units 3 and 4 

Boiler Heat Input 5,485.2 mmBTU/hrFuelFuel Sulfur 0.76 % (wt.)HHV 9,502 BTU/lbDescription Units 1 2 3 4

Powdered 

Activated Carbon 

(4 lbs/MMACF)

Ash Solids From 

Existing Ash 

Conveying 

System

Ash Solids From 

PJFF Ash 

Handling System

Ash Solids to 

Disposal

Total Mass Flow lb/hr 556 62,908 62,908 126,372Specific Gravity (For Hoppers/Silos) lb/ft3 26.5 40 40 40

Volumetric Flow ft3/hr 21 1573 1573 3159

Description Units A B C D E

Flue Gas from 

Air Heaters

Flue Gas to 

Baghouse

Flue Gas from 

Baghouse

Flue Gas From 

Booster Fans

Flue Gas from 

Absorber Cells 

to Stack

Total Mass Flow (w/ Solids) lb/hr 6,131,463 6,132,027 6,129,275 6,129,275 6,437,701Temperature °F 279 279 279 299 123

Flue Gas Pressure in.wg. -1.2 -5.9 -15.9 12.5 4.2

Molecular Weight (wet) lb/lbmol 29.38 29.38 29.37 29.37 28.56

Volumetric Flow (w/o Solids) ACFM 2,282,999 2,315,893 2,413,338 2,274,692 1,933,399

CO2 lb/hr 1,146,630 1,146,630 1,146,630 1,146,630 1,152,614

H2O lb/hr 324,454 324,454 325,230 325,230 612,754

SO2 lb/hr 8,600 8,600 8,600 8,600 860

N2 lb/hr 4,268,137 4,268,137 4,314,129 4,314,129 4,333,939O2 lb/hr 320,453 320,453 334,372 334,372 338,248HCl lb/hr 210 210 210 210 0

Ash + PAC lb/hr 62,908 63,464 66 66 37

HF lb/hr 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

SO3 lb/hr 79 79 39 39 23

Operating Conditions

Design Coal

Notes:  1. Reference Schematic, Flue Gas Mass Balance Diagram, in Section 10.0 for stream cross references.  2. Performance Conditions - 99% eff., 0% Bypass, 35% Open Absorber Tray Area, 2700ppm DBA, 4 lbs PAC/mmACF, 5

Over, 20% Excess Air, 10% Air Heater Leakage, and 1% PJFF Leakage. 

3.4.2 Units 1 & 2 later. 
Attachment 3 
SJGS Unit 1, Heat Input (HHV) = 3,707 MBtu/hr

Stack Outlet Conditions Flow (acfm) Stack Velocity (ft/s) Temperature (°F) Pressure (in, wg) NOx (lb/MBtu) NOx (lb/hr) SO2 (lb/MBtu) SO2 (lb/hr) PM (lb/MBtu) PM (lb/hr) SO3 (lb/MB

Pre-Consent Decree Operation 1,406,021 74 145.00 -0.20 0.43 1,592.0 0.24 877.8 0.050 185.4 0.013 Visibility Modeling Baseline CasePost-Consent Decree Upgrades (LNB/OFA, PJFF) 1,323,494 70 121.42 0.01 0.33 1,223.3 0.18 667.3 0.015 55.6 0.011 With additional NOx Control Technologies

1. Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) 1,325,998 70 121.42 0.01 0.07 259.5 0.18 667.3 0.015 55.6 0.031 

2. SNCR/SCR Hybrid 1,324,112 70 121.42 0.01 0.18 667.3 0.18 667.3 0.015 55.6 0.031 

3. ROFA and Rotamix 1,323,851 70 121.42 0.01 0.20 741.4 0.18 667.3 0.015 55.6 0.011 

4. ACT HERT SNCR 1,323,851 70 121.42 0.01 0.20 741.4 0.18 667.3 0.015 55.6 0.011 

4. Rotamix 1,323,904 70 121.42 0.01 0.23 852.6 0.18 667.3 0.015 55.6 0.011 5. FuelTech SNCR 1,323,904 70 121.42 0.01 0.24 889.7 0.18 667.3 0.015 55.6 0.011 6. Rotating Overfire Air (ROFA) 1,323,494 70 121.42 0.01 0.26 963.8 0.18 667.3 0.015 55.6 0.011 

With additional PM Control Technologies1. WESP 1,323,494 70 121.42 0.01 0.33 1,223.3 0.18 667.3 0.010 37.1 0.007 Notes1. Emission levels (lb/MBtu) shown are on a 24-hour average basis.2. Emission in (lb/hr) is calculated based on the emission level (lb/MBtu) and design basis heat input.3. Emission levels on a 24-hour average basis are assumed to be similar to the annual average basis.4. Pre-consent decree operation emission level (lb/MBtu) are based on annual averages from year 2001 to 2003.5. Post-consent decree upgrades emissions for visibility modeling purpose are based on information provided by PNM, 4/19/2007.6. Stack velocity is calculated based upon volumetric flowrate and 6.10 m stack diameter.7. All flow conditions are based on the coal as shown in the Design Basis document.8. All SO3 emissions are reported as Sulfuric Acid Mist (H2SO4).

9. SO3 emissions for the pre- and post-consent decree cases are determined using the National Park Service calculation formula.

10. SO3 emissions for the additional NOx control technologies with catalyst accounts for an additional 1.0% SO2 to SO3 conversion (based on design basis economizer outlet SO2 levels) and 0% SO3 removal in PJFF.

11. Pre-CD flue gas flow, temperature, pressure properties were referenced from PM test reports for year 2001 to 2003.

Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM) - San Juan Generating Station (SJGS) Unit 1

Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Engineering Analysis

Stack Outlet Conditions for Visibility Modeling (24-hour Average Emission Rates) Rev. 7

Black & Veatch 
SJGS Unit 2, Heat Input (HHV) = 3,688 MBtu/hr

Stack Outlet Conditions Flow (acfm) Stack Velocity (ft/s) Temperature (°F) Pressure (in, wg) NOx (lb/MBtu) NOx (lb/hr) SO2 (lb/MBtu) SO2 (lb/hr) PM (lb/MBtu) PM (lb/hr) SO3 (lb/MB

Pre-Consent Decree Operation 1,444,718 77 148.00 -0.16 0.45 1,649.3 0.23 844.0 0.050 184.4 0.013 Visibility Modeling Baseline CasePost-Consent Decree Upgrades (LNB/OFA, PJFF) 1,316,710 70 121.42 0.01 0.33 1,217.0 0.18 663.8 0.015 55.3 0.011 With additional NOx Control Technologies

1. Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) 1,319,201 70 121.42 0.01 0.07 258.2 0.18 663.8 0.015 55.3 0.031 

2. SNCR/SCR Hybrid 1,317,328 70 121.42 0.01 0.18 663.8 0.18 663.8 0.015 55.3 0.031 

3. ROFA and Rotamix 1,317,067 70 121.42 0.01 0.20 737.6 0.18 663.8 0.015 55.3 0.011 

4. ACT HERT SNCR 1,317,067 70 121.42 0.01 0.20 737.6 0.18 663.8 0.015 55.3 0.011 

4. Rotamix 1,317,120 70 121.42 0.01 0.23 848.2 0.18 663.8 0.015 55.3 0.011 5. FuelTech SNCR 1,317,120 70 121.42 0.01 0.24 885.1 0.18 663.8 0.015 55.3 0.011 6. Rotating Overfire Air (ROFA) 1,316,710 70 121.42 0.01 0.26 958.9 0.18 663.8 0.015 55.3 0.011 

With additional PM Control Technologies1. WESP 1,316,710 70 121.42 0.01 0.33 1,217.0 0.18 663.8 0.010 36.9 0.007 Notes1. Emission levels (lb/MBtu) shown are on a 24-hour average basis.2. Emission in (lb/hr) is calculated based on the emission level (lb/MBtu) and design basis heat input.3. Emission levels on a 24-hour average basis are assumed to be similar to the annual average basis.4. Pre-consent decree operation emission level (lb/MBtu) are based on annual averages from year 2001 to 2003.5. Post-consent decree upgrades emissions for visibility modeling purpose are based on information provided by PNM, 4/19/2007.6. Stack velocity is calculated based upon volumetric flowrate and 6.10 m stack diameter.7. All flow conditions are based on the coal as shown in the Design Basis document.8. All SO3 emissions are reported as Sulfuric Acid Mist (H2SO4).

9. SO3 emissions for the pre- and post-consent decree cases are determined using the National Park Service calculation formula.

10. SO3 emissions for the additional NOx control technologies with catalyst accounts for an additional 1.0% SO2 to SO3 conversion (based on design basis economizer outlet SO2 levels) and 0% SO3 removal in PJFF.

11. Pre-CD flue gas flow, temperature, pressure properties were referenced from PM test reports for year 2001 to 2003.

Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM) - San Juan Generating Station (SJGS) Unit 2

Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Engineering Analysis

Stack Outlet Conditions for Visibility Modeling (24-hour Average Emission Rates) Rev. 7

Black & Veatch 
SJGS Unit 3, Heat Input (HHV) = 5,758 MBtu/hr

Stack Outlet Conditions Flow (acfm) Stack Velocity (ft/s) Temperature (°F) Pressure (in, wg) NOx (lb/MBtu) NOx (lb/hr) SO2 (lb/MBtu) SO2 (lb/hr) PM (lb/MBtu) PM (lb/hr) SO3 (lb/MB

Pre-Consent Decree Operation 2,075,452 56 143.00 -0.22 0.42 2,405.5 0.28 1,591.1 0.050 287.9 0.013 Visibility Modeling Baseline CasePost-Consent Decree Upgrades (LNB/OFA, PJFF) 2,055,753 56 121.42 0.01 0.33 1,900.1 0.18 1,036.4 0.015 86.4 0.011 With additional NOx Control Technologies

1. Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) 2,059,643 56 121.42 0.01 0.07 403.1 0.18 1,036.4 0.015 86.4 0.031 

2. SNCR/SCR Hybrid 2,056,712 56 121.42 0.01 0.18 1,036.4 0.18 1,036.4 0.015 86.4 0.031 

3. ROFA and Rotamix 2,056,299 56 121.42 0.01 0.20 1,151.6 0.18 1,036.4 0.015 86.4 0.011 

4. ACT HERT SNCR 2,056,299 56 121.42 0.01 0.20 1,151.6 0.18 1,036.4 0.015 86.4 0.011 

4. Rotamix 2,056,389 56 121.42 0.01 0.23 1,324.3 0.18 1,036.4 0.015 86.4 0.011 5. FuelTech SNCR 2,056,389 56 121.42 0.01 0.24 1,381.9 0.18 1,036.4 0.015 86.4 0.011 6. Rotating Overfire Air (ROFA) 2,055,753 56 121.42 0.01 0.26 1,497.1 0.18 1,036.4 0.015 86.4 0.011 

With additional PM Control Technologies1. WESP 2,055,753 56 121.42 0.01 0.33 1,900.1 0.18 1,036.4 0.010 57.6 0.007 Notes1. Emission levels (lb/MBtu) shown are on a 24-hour average basis.2. Emission in (lb/hr) is calculated based on the emission level (lb/MBtu) and design basis heat input.3. Emission levels on a 24-hour average basis are assumed to be similar to the annual average basis.4. Pre-consent decree operation emission level (lb/MBtu) are based on annual averages from year 2001 to 2003.5. Post-consent decree upgrades emissions for visibility modeling purpose are based on information provided by PNM, 4/19/2007.6. Stack velocity is calculated based upon volumetric flowrate and 6.10 m stack diameter.7. All flow conditions are based on the coal as shown in the Design Basis document.8. All SO3 emissions are reported as Sulfuric Acid Mist (H2SO4).

9. SO3 emissions for the pre- and post-consent decree cases are determined using the National Park Service calculation formula.

10. SO3 emissions for the additional NOx control technologies with catalyst accounts for an additional 1.0% SO2 to SO3 conversion (based on design basis economizer outlet SO2 levels) and 0% SO3 removal in PJFF.

11. Pre-CD flue gas flow, temperature, pressure properties were referenced from PM test reports for year 2001 to 2003.

Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM) - San Juan Generating Station (SJGS) Unit 3

Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Engineering Analysis

Stack Outlet Conditions for Visibility Modeling (24-hour Average Emission Rates) Rev. 7

Black & Veatch 
SJGS Unit 4, Heat Input (HHV) = 5,649 MBtu/hr

Stack Outlet Conditions Flow (acfm) Stack Velocity (ft/s) Temperature (°F) Pressure (in, wg) NOx (lb/MBtu) NOx (lb/hr) SO2 (lb/MBtu) SO2 (lb/hr) PM (lb/MBtu) PM (lb/hr) SO3 (lb/MB

Pre-Consent Decree Operation 2,093,240 57 137.00 -0.21 0.42 2,399.6 0.29 1,662.4 0.050 282.5 0.013 Visibility Modeling Baseline CasePost-Consent Decree Upgrades (LNB/OFA, PJFF) 2,016,837 55 121.42 0.01 0.33 1,864.2 0.18 1,016.8 0.015 84.7 0.011 With additional NOx Control Technologies

1. Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) 2,020,653 55 121.42 0.01 0.07 395.4 0.18 1,016.8 0.015 84.7 0.031 

2. SNCR/SCR Hybrid 2,017,796 55 121.42 0.01 0.18 1,016.8 0.18 1,016.8 0.015 84.7 0.031 

3. ROFA and Rotamix 2,017,383 55 121.42 0.01 0.20 1,129.8 0.18 1,016.8 0.015 84.7 0.011 

4. ACT HERT SNCR 2,017,383 55 121.42 0.01 0.20 1,129.8 0.18 1,016.8 0.015 84.7 0.011 

4. Rotamix 2,017,473 55 121.42 0.01 0.23 1,299.3 0.18 1,016.8 0.015 84.7 0.011 5. FuelTech SNCR 2,017,473 55 121.42 0.01 0.24 1,355.8 0.18 1,016.8 0.015 84.7 0.011 6. Rotating Overfire Air (ROFA) 2,016,837 55 121.42 0.01 0.26 1,468.7 0.18 1,016.8 0.015 84.7 0.011 

With additional PM Control Technologies1. WESP 2,016,837 55 121.42 0.01 0.33 1,864.2 0.18 1,016.8 0.010 56.5 0.007 Notes1. Emission levels (lb/MBtu) shown are on a 24-hour average basis.2. Emission in (lb/hr) is calculated based on the emission level (lb/MBtu) and design basis heat input.3. Emission levels on a 24-hour average basis are assumed to be similar to the annual average basis.4. Pre-consent decree operation emission level (lb/MBtu) are based on annual averages from year 2001 to 2003.5. Post-consent decree upgrades emissions for visibility modeling purpose are based on information provided by PNM, 4/19/2007.6. Stack velocity is calculated based upon volumetric flowrate and 6.10 m stack diameter.7. All flow conditions are based on the coal as shown in the Design Basis document.8. All SO3 emissions are reported as Sulfuric Acid Mist (H2SO4).

9. SO3 emissions for the pre- and post-consent decree cases are determined using the National Park Service calculation formula.

10. SO3 emissions for the additional NOx control technologies with catalyst accounts for an additional 1.0% SO2 to SO3 conversion (based on design basis economizer outlet SO2 levels) and 0% SO3 removal in PJFF.

11. Pre-CD flue gas flow, temperature, pressure properties were referenced from PM test reports for year 2001 to 2003.

Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM) - San Juan Generating Station (SJGS) Unit 4

Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Engineering Analysis

Stack Outlet Conditions for Visibility Modeling (24-hour Average Emission Rates) Rev. 7

Black & Veatch 
Attachment 4 
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Technology: Sorbent Injection - SJGS Unit 1 (SCR or SCR/SNCR Hybrid) Date: 2/25/2009

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

Long-term storage silo (with truck unloading sys.) $891,000 B&V cost estimate

Short-term storage silo $590,000 B&V cost estimate

Air blowers $806,000 B&V cost estimate

Rotary feeders $92,000 B&V cost estimate

Injection system $372,000 B&V cost estimate

Ductwork modifications, supports, platforms $72,000 B&V cost estimate

Electrical system upgrades $115,000 B&V cost estimate

Instrumentation and control system $115,000 B&V cost estimate

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $3,053,000

Gross Receipt Tax $188,904 (CC) X 6.2%

Freight $152,650 (CC) X 5.0%

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $3,395,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $340,000 (PEC) X 10.0%

Handling & erection $849,000 (PEC) X 25.0%

Electrical $340,000 (PEC) X 10.0%

Piping $68,000 (PEC) X 2.0%

Insulation $34,000 (PEC) X 1.0%

Painting $0 (PEC) X 0.0%

Demolition $68,000 (PEC) X 2.0%

Relocation $34,000 (PEC) X 1.0%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $1,733,000

Site preparation $0 N/A

Buildings $75,000 N/A

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $5,203,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $364,000 (DC) X 7.0%

Owner's cost $260,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Construction management $520,000 (DC) X 10.0%

Start-up and spare parts $156,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Performance test $100,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate

Contingencies $1,041,000 (DC) X 20.0%

Total indirect costs (IC) $2,441,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $283,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $7,927,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated manpower level

Maintenance labor and materials $156,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $281,000

Variable annual costs - Case 4/5

Sorbent (hydrated lime) $347,000 856 lb/hr and 109 $/ton stoic. ratio = 10

Auxiliary power $73,000 160 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Engineering estimate

Total variable annual costs $420,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC45) $701,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $772,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $772,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC45) + (IDAC) for Case 4/5 $1,473,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Technology: Sorbent Injection - SJGS Unit 2 (SCR or SCR/SNCR Hybrid) Date: 2/25/2009

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

Long-term storage silo (with truck unloading sys.) $891,000 B&V cost estimate

Short-term storage silo $590,000 B&V cost estimate

Air blowers $806,000 B&V cost estimate

Rotary feeders $92,000 B&V cost estimate

Injection system $372,000 B&V cost estimate

Ductwork modifications, supports, platforms $72,000 B&V cost estimate

Electrical system upgrades $115,000 B&V cost estimate

Instrumentation and control system $115,000 B&V cost estimate

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $3,053,000

Gross Receipt Tax $188,904 (CC) X 6.2%

Freight $152,650 (CC) X 5.0%

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $3,395,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $340,000 (PEC) X 10.0%

Handling & erection $849,000 (PEC) X 25.0%

Electrical $340,000 (PEC) X 10.0%

Piping $68,000 (PEC) X 2.0%

Insulation $34,000 (PEC) X 1.0%

Painting $0 (PEC) X 0.0%

Demolition $68,000 (PEC) X 2.0%

Relocation $34,000 (PEC) X 1.0%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $1,733,000

Site preparation $0 N/A

Buildings $75,000 N/A

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $5,203,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $364,000 (DC) X 7.0%

Owner's cost $260,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Construction management $520,000 (DC) X 10.0%

Start-up and spare parts $156,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Performance test $100,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate

Contingencies $1,041,000 (DC) X 20.0%

Total indirect costs (IC) $2,441,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $283,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $7,927,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated manpower level

Maintenance labor and materials $156,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $281,000

Variable annual costs - Case 4/5

Sorbent (hydrated lime) $347,000 856 lb/hr and 109 $/ton stoic. ratio = 10

Auxiliary power $73,000 160 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Engineering estimate

Total variable annual costs $420,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC45) $701,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $772,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $772,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC45) + (IDAC) for Case 4/5 $1,473,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Technology: Sorbent Injection - SJGS Unit 3 (SCR or SCR/SNCR Hybrid) Date: 2/25/2009

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

Long-term storage silo (with truck unloading sys.) $1,386,000 B&V cost estimate

Short-term storage silo $918,000 B&V cost estimate

Air blowers $1,254,000 B&V cost estimate

Rotary feeders $143,000 B&V cost estimate

Injection system $578,000 B&V cost estimate

Ductwork modifications, supports, platforms $112,000 B&V cost estimate

Electrical system upgrades $179,000 B&V cost estimate

Instrumentation and control system $179,000 B&V cost estimate

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $4,749,000

Gross Receipt Tax $293,844 (CC) X 6.2%

Freight $237,450 (CC) X 5.0%

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $5,280,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $528,000 (PEC) X 10.0%

Handling & erection $1,320,000 (PEC) X 25.0%

Electrical $528,000 (PEC) X 10.0%

Piping $106,000 (PEC) X 2.0%

Insulation $53,000 (PEC) X 1.0%

Painting $0 (PEC) X 0.0%

Demolition $106,000 (PEC) X 2.0%

Relocation $53,000 (PEC) X 1.0%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $2,694,000

Site preparation $0 N/A

Buildings $75,000 N/A

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $8,049,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $563,000 (DC) X 7.0%

Owner's cost $402,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Construction management $805,000 (DC) X 10.0%

Start-up and spare parts $241,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Performance test $100,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate

Contingencies $1,610,000 (DC) X 20.0%

Total indirect costs (IC) $3,721,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $436,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $12,206,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated manpower level

Maintenance labor and materials $241,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $366,000

Variable annual costs - Case 4/5

Sorbent (hydrated lime) $540,000 1,330 lb/hr and 109 $/ton stoic. ratio = 10

Auxiliary power $73,000 160 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Engineering estimate

Total variable annual costs $613,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC45) $979,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $1,189,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $1,189,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC45) + (IDAC) for Case 4/5 $2,168,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Technology: Sorbent Injection - SJGS Unit 4 (SCR or SCR/SNCR Hybrid) Date: 2/25/2009

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

Long-term storage silo (with truck unloading sys.) $1,386,000 B&V cost estimate

Short-term storage silo $918,000 B&V cost estimate

Air blowers $1,254,000 B&V cost estimate

Rotary feeders $143,000 B&V cost estimate

Injection system $578,000 B&V cost estimate

Ductwork modifications, supports, platforms $112,000 B&V cost estimate

Electrical system upgrades $179,000 B&V cost estimate

Instrumentation and control system $179,000 B&V cost estimate

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $4,749,000

Gross Receipt Tax $293,844 (CC) X 6.2%

Freight $237,450 (CC) X 5.0%

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $5,280,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $528,000 (PEC) X 10.0%

Handling & erection $1,320,000 (PEC) X 25.0%

Electrical $528,000 (PEC) X 10.0%

Piping $106,000 (PEC) X 2.0%

Insulation $53,000 (PEC) X 1.0%

Painting $0 (PEC) X 0.0%

Demolition $106,000 (PEC) X 2.0%

Relocation $53,000 (PEC) X 1.0%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $2,694,000

Site preparation $0 N/A

Buildings $75,000 N/A

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $8,049,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $563,000 (DC) X 7.0%

Owner's cost $402,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Construction management $805,000 (DC) X 10.0%

Start-up and spare parts $241,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Performance test $100,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate

Contingencies $1,610,000 (DC) X 20.0%

Total indirect costs (IC) $3,721,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $436,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $12,206,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated manpower level

Maintenance labor and materials $241,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $366,000

Variable annual costs - Case 4/5

Sorbent (hydrated lime) $540,000 1,330 lb/hr and 109 $/ton stoic. ratio = 10

Auxiliary power $73,000 160 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Engineering estimate

Total variable annual costs $613,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC45) $979,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $1,189,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $1,189,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC45) + (IDAC) for Case 4/5 $2,168,000
Attachment 5 
PNM BART SO3 Technology Control Strategy Review

Last Updated

Total Total

Expected Expected Expected Capital Annualized

Emission Emission Emission Investment Cost Cost Energy 

Rate Rate Reduction (TCI) (TAC) Effectiveness Impacts 

All Feasible Technologies (lb/h) (ton/yr) (ton/yr) (1,000$) (1,000$) ($/ton) (1,000$) 

SJGS Unit 1

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) 62.6 233 -82 156,805 20,525 -249,458 1,496 SNCR/SCR Hybrid 62.6 233 -82 104,436 16,207 -196,978 706 SCR with Sorbent Injection 16.1 60 91 164,732 21,998 242,060 1,569 SNCR/SCR Hybrid with Sorbent Injection 16.1 60 91 112,363 17,680 194,546 779 

SJGS Unit 2

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) 62.3 232 -82 169,251 21,891 -267,391 1,492 SNCR/SCR Hybrid 62.3 232 -82 108,628 16,670 -203,619 346 SCR with Sorbent Injection 16.0 60 90 177,178 23,364 258,361 1,565 SNCR/SCR Hybrid with Sorbent Injection 16.0 60 90 116,555 18,143 200,627 419 

SJGS Unit 3

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) 97.2 362 -128 215,568 28,359 -221,948 2,194 SNCR/SCR Hybrid 97.2 362 -128 168,507 25,606 -200,402 507 SCR with Sorbent Injection 25.0 93 141 227,774 30,527 216,290 2,267 SNCR/SCR Hybrid with Sorbent Injection 25.0 93 141 180,713 27,774 196,785 580 

SJGS Unit 4

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) 95.4 355 -125 199,558 26,592 -212,136 2,215 SNCR/SCR Hybrid 95.4 355 -125 161,572 24,849 -198,232 507 SCR with Sorbent Injection 24.5 91 138 211,764 28,760 207,772 2,288 SNCR/SCR Hybrid with Sorbent Injection 24.5 91 138 173,778 27,017 195,180 580 

Notes:1. All costs are in 2007$.2. Expected emission rates (ton/yr) calculations were based on 85 percent unit capacity factor (referer to Appendix A Design Basis).3. Expected emission reduction (ton/yr) calculations were based on the consent decree upgrades control effectiveness.4. TCI and TAC are referenced from Appendix C Cost Analysis Summary.5. Cost-effectiveness ($/ton) is defined as ratio of TAC over Expected Emission Reduction (ton/yr).6. Expected emission reduction is based on annual emission reduction from consent decree upgrade emission levels.7. Incremental cost effectiveness are based on increments in expected emission reduction (ton/yr)

Table 1

Impact Analysis and Cost Effectiveness Results of SO3 Control Technologies for SJGS
Attachment 6 
3/16/09 Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 1 of 148 

SCR with Inherent SO3 Removal 
3/16/09 Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 2 of 148 

Table 1 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Facility 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.92 1.76 1.82 1.83 1.92 

Bandelier 1.31 1.86 1.51 1.56 1.86 

Black Canyon 1.14 1.34 1.40 1.29 1.40 

Canyonlands 2.59 2.04 2.00 2.21 2.59 

Capitol Reef 1.97 1.16 1.34 1.49 1.97 

Grand Canyon 1.14 0.93 0.81 0.96 1.14 

Great Sand Dunes 0.85 1.00 0.82 0.89 1.00 

La Garita 1.15 1.30 1.14 1.20 1.30 

Maroon Bells 0.67 0.78 0.63 0.70 0.78 

Mesa Verde 4.20 4.09 4.85 4.38 4.85 

Pecos 1.40 1.33 1.26 1.33 1.40 

Petrified Forest 1.13 0.79 0.74 0.88 1.13 

San Pedro 1.78 2.37 1.96 2.04 2.37 

West Elk 0.99 1.15 0.94 1.03 1.15 

Weminuche 1.51 1.85 1.69 1.69 1.85 

Wheeler Peak 1.00 0.95 1.05 1.00 1.05 

Overall 1.53 4.85 

 
3/16/09 Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 3 of 148 

Table 2 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Facility 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.69 1.65 1.49 1.61 1.69 

Bandelier 1.04 1.56 1.20 1.27 1.56 

Black Canyon 0.95 1.15 1.07 1.05 1.15 

Canyonlands 2.26 1.73 1.68 1.89 2.26 

Capitol Reef 1.81 0.82 1.05 1.23 1.81 

Grand Canyon 0.97 0.76 0.57 0.77 0.97 

Great Sand Dunes 0.63 0.71 0.64 0.66 0.71 

La Garita 0.86 0.94 0.90 0.90 0.94 

Maroon Bells 0.54 0.56 0.51 0.54 0.56 

Mesa Verde 3.38 3.53 3.80 3.57 3.80 

Pecos 1.05 1.09 1.00 1.05 1.09 

Petrified Forest 0.82 0.60 0.53 0.65 0.82 

San Pedro 1.40 2.01 1.56 1.66 2.01 

West Elk 0.80 0.91 0.83 0.85 0.91 

Weminuche 1.15 1.48 1.34 1.33 1.48 

Wheeler Peak 0.75 0.86 0.89 0.83 0.89 

Overall 1.24 3.80 

 
3/16/09 Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 4 of 148 

Table 3 

SCR with Inherent SO3 Reduction Visibility Modeling Results - Facility 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.34 1.22 1.18 1.25 1.34 

Bandelier 0.71 1.07 0.98 0.92 1.07 

Black Canyon 0.67 0.69 0.77 0.71 0.77 

Canyonlands 1.97 1.36 1.49 1.61 1.97 

Capitol Reef 1.27 0.67 0.86 0.93 1.27 

Grand Canyon 0.60 0.54 0.48 0.54 0.60 

Great Sand Dunes 0.49 0.48 0.40 0.46 0.49 

La Garita 0.49 0.56 0.56 0.54 0.56 

Maroon Bells 0.34 0.36 0.30 0.33 0.36 

Mesa Verde 4.00 3.79 4.27 4.02 4.27 

Pecos 0.69 0.79 0.84 0.77 0.84 

Petrified Forest 0.58 0.47 0.48 0.51 0.58 

San Pedro 1.34 1.57 1.46 1.46 1.57 

West Elk 0.53 0.57 0.48 0.53 0.57 

Weminuche 0.80 1.22 0.94 0.99 1.22 

Wheeler Peak 0.60 0.55 0.59 0.58 0.60 

Overall 1.01 4.27 

 
3/16/09 Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 5 of 148 

Table 4 

Facility Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visibi

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) 

(98th Percentile, see Note 1) Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for each Class 1 Area) 

Class 1 Area Pre-Consent Decree Consent Decree 

SCR with Inherent 

SO3 Removal 

Pre-Consent Decree 

to Consent Decree 

Consent Decree to 

SCR 

Pre-Consent Decree 

to SCR 

Arches 1.92 1.69 1.34 0.23 0.35 0.58 Bandelier 1.86 1.56 1.07 0.31 0.48 0.79 Black Canyon 1.40 1.15 0.77 0.26 0.38 0.63 Canyonlands 2.59 2.26 1.97 0.33 0.30 0.62 Capitol Reef 1.97 1.81 1.27 0.16 0.54 0.70 Grand Canyon 1.14 0.97 0.60 0.17 0.37 0.54 Great Sand Dunes 1.00 0.71 0.49 0.29 0.23 0.51 La Garita 1.30 0.94 0.56 0.36 0.38 0.74 Maroon Bells 0.78 0.56 0.36 0.22 0.20 0.42 Mesa Verde 4.85 3.80 4.27 1.06 NI 0.59 Pecos 1.40 1.09 0.84 0.31 0.26 0.56 Petrified Forest 1.13 0.82 0.58 0.31 0.24 0.55 San Pedro 2.37 2.01 1.57 0.36 0.45 0.81 West Elk 1.15 0.91 0.57 0.24 0.35 0.58 Weminuche 1.85 1.48 1.22 0.37 0.26 0.63 Wheeler Peak 1.05 0.89 0.60 0.16 0.29 0.45 Notes: 

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data. 2. NI = No Improvement 3. NA = Not Applicable 4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000): 

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree (w/o inj.) $51,468 Consent Decree to SCR (w/o inj.) $97,367 Pre-Consent Decree to SCR (w/o inj.) $148,835 
3/16/09 Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 6 of 148 

Table 5 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 1 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.82 0.68 0.60 0.70 0.82 

Bandelier 0.31 0.49 0.54 0.45 0.54 

Black Canyon 0.35 0.37 0.38 0.37 0.38 

Canyonlands 1.10 0.84 0.71 0.88 1.10 

Capitol Reef 0.76 0.23 0.32 0.44 0.76 

Grand Canyon 0.31 0.21 0.16 0.23 0.31 

Great Sand Dunes 0.18 0.20 0.17 0.18 0.20 

La Garita 0.26 0.28 0.29 0.28 0.29 

Maroon Bells 0.18 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.18 

Mesa Verde 1.51 1.79 1.67 1.66 1.79 

Pecos 0.29 0.31 0.35 0.32 0.35 

Petrified Forest 0.25 0.16 0.14 0.18 0.25 

San Pedro 0.61 0.73 0.63 0.66 0.73 

West Elk 0.27 0.28 0.25 0.27 0.28 

Weminuche 0.37 0.54 0.45 0.45 0.54 

Wheeler Peak 0.24 0.25 0.26 0.25 0.26 

Overall 0.47 1.79 

 
3/16/09 Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 7 of 148 

Table 6 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 1 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.69 0.54 0.52 0.58 0.69 

Bandelier 0.24 0.40 0.37 0.34 0.40 

Black Canyon 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.29 0.29 

Canyonlands 1.00 0.65 0.57 0.74 1.00 

Capitol Reef 0.57 0.18 0.23 0.33 0.57 

Grand Canyon 0.27 0.16 0.12 0.18 0.27 

Great Sand Dunes 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 

La Garita 0.19 0.21 0.21 0.20 0.21 

Maroon Bells 0.14 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.14 

Mesa Verde 1.35 1.40 1.27 1.34 1.40 

Pecos 0.23 0.24 0.27 0.25 0.27 

Petrified Forest 0.19 0.13 0.11 0.14 0.19 

San Pedro 0.44 0.59 0.50 0.51 0.59 

West Elk 0.22 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.22 

Weminuche 0.31 0.43 0.35 0.36 0.43 

Wheeler Peak 0.19 0.17 0.20 0.19 0.20 

Overall 0.37 1.40 

 
3/16/09 Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 8 of 148 

Table 7 

SCR with Inherent SO3 Removal Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 1 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.37 0.29 0.34 0.33 0.37 

Bandelier 0.15 0.23 0.20 0.20 0.23 

Black Canyon 0.14 0.15 0.17 0.15 0.17 

Canyonlands 0.58 0.34 0.37 0.43 0.58 

Capitol Reef 0.28 0.13 0.20 0.20 0.28 

Grand Canyon 0.14 0.11 0.10 0.12 0.14 

Great Sand Dunes 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.09 0.10 

La Garita 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.11 0.12 

Maroon Bells 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.07 0.07 

Mesa Verde 1.02 1.03 1.14 1.06 1.14 

Pecos 0.15 0.17 0.18 0.16 0.18 

Petrified Forest 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.11 

San Pedro 0.31 0.39 0.32 0.34 0.39 

West Elk 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 

Weminuche 0.17 0.28 0.21 0.22 0.28 

Wheeler Peak 0.13 0.11 0.13 0.12 0.13 

Overall 0.24 1.14 

 
3/16/09 Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 9 of 148 

Table 8 

Unit 1 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visib

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) 

(98th Percentile, see Note 1) Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for each Class 1 Area

Class 1 Area Pre-Consent Decree Consent Decree 

SCR with Inherent 

SO3 Removal 

Pre-Consent Decree 

to Consent Decree 

Consent Decree to 

SCR 

Pre-Consent Decre

to SCR 

Arches 0.82 0.69 0.37 0.13 0.33 0.46 Bandelier 0.54 0.40 0.23 0.14 0.17 0.31 Black Canyon 0.38 0.29 0.17 0.09 0.12 0.21 Canyonlands 1.10 1.00 0.58 0.10 0.42 0.52 Capitol Reef 0.76 0.57 0.28 0.19 0.29 0.48 Grand Canyon 0.31 0.27 0.14 0.04 0.13 0.17 Great Sand Dunes 0.20 0.14 0.10 0.06 0.04 0.10 La Garita 0.29 0.21 0.12 0.08 0.09 0.17 Maroon Bells 0.18 0.14 0.07 0.04 0.07 0.11 Mesa Verde 1.79 1.40 1.14 0.39 0.26 0.65 Pecos 0.35 0.27 0.18 0.08 0.09 0.17 Petrified Forest 0.25 0.19 0.11 0.06 0.08 0.14 San Pedro 0.73 0.59 0.39 0.14 0.20 0.34 West Elk 0.28 0.22 0.11 0.06 0.11 0.17 Weminuche 0.54 0.43 0.28 0.11 0.15 0.26 Wheeler Peak 0.26 0.20 0.13 0.06 0.07 0.13 Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data. 2. NI = No Improvement 3. NA = Not Applicable 4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000): 

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree (w/o inj.) $11,849 Consent Decree to SCR (w/o inj.) $20,525 Pre-Consent Decree to SCR (w/o inj.) $32,374 
3/16/09 Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 10 of 148 

Table 9 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 2 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.83 0.64 0.58 0.68 0.83 

Bandelier 0.32 0.50 0.54 0.45 0.54 

Black Canyon 0.36 0.37 0.39 0.37 0.39 

Canyonlands 1.07 0.83 0.72 0.87 1.07 

Capitol Reef 0.78 0.23 0.31 0.44 0.78 

Grand Canyon 0.31 0.20 0.16 0.22 0.31 

Great Sand Dunes 0.19 0.21 0.17 0.19 0.21 

La Garita 0.26 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.29 

Maroon Bells 0.18 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.18 

Mesa Verde 1.49 1.82 1.66 1.66 1.82 

Pecos 0.29 0.31 0.36 0.32 0.36 

Petrified Forest 0.25 0.16 0.14 0.18 0.25 

San Pedro 0.63 0.73 0.64 0.67 0.73 

West Elk 0.27 0.29 0.26 0.27 0.29 

Weminuche 0.38 0.56 0.44 0.46 0.56 

Wheeler Peak 0.24 0.26 0.26 0.25 0.26 

Overall 0.47 1.82 

 
3/16/09 Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 11 of 148 

Table 10 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 2 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.69 0.54 0.52 0.58 0.69 

Bandelier 0.23 0.40 0.37 0.33 0.40 

Black Canyon 0.28 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.29 

Canyonlands 0.99 0.65 0.57 0.74 0.99 

Capitol Reef 0.57 0.18 0.23 0.33 0.57 

Grand Canyon 0.27 0.16 0.12 0.18 0.27 

Great Sand Dunes 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 

La Garita 0.19 0.21 0.21 0.20 0.21 

Maroon Bells 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.14 

Mesa Verde 1.35 1.40 1.26 1.34 1.40 

Pecos 0.23 0.24 0.27 0.25 0.27 

Petrified Forest 0.19 0.13 0.11 0.14 0.19 

San Pedro 0.44 0.58 0.50 0.51 0.58 

West Elk 0.22 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.22 

Weminuche 0.31 0.42 0.35 0.36 0.42 

Wheeler Peak 0.18 0.17 0.20 0.18 0.20 

Overall 0.37 1.40 

 
3/16/09 Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 12 of 148 

Table 11 

SCR with Inherent SO3 Removal Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 2 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.36 0.28 0.34 0.33 0.36 

Bandelier 0.15 0.23 0.20 0.20 0.23 

Black Canyon 0.14 0.15 0.17 0.15 0.17 

Canyonlands 0.58 0.34 0.37 0.43 0.58 

Capitol Reef 0.28 0.13 0.20 0.20 0.28 

Grand Canyon 0.14 0.11 0.10 0.12 0.14 

Great Sand Dunes 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.09 0.10 

La Garita 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.11 0.12 

Maroon Bells 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.07 0.07 

Mesa Verde 1.02 1.03 1.14 1.06 1.14 

Pecos 0.15 0.16 0.18 0.16 0.18 

Petrified Forest 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.11 

San Pedro 0.31 0.39 0.32 0.34 0.39 

West Elk 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 

Weminuche 0.17 0.28 0.21 0.22 0.28 

Wheeler Peak 0.13 0.11 0.13 0.12 0.13 

Overall 0.24 1.14 

 
3/16/09 Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 13 of 148 

Table 12 

Unit 2 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visib

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) 

(98th Percentile, see Note 1) Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for each Class 1 Area

Class 1 Area Pre-Consent Decree Consent Decree 

SCR with Inherent 

SO3 Removal 

Pre-Consent Decree 

to Consent Decree 

Consent Decree to 

SCR 

Pre-Consent Decre

to SCR 

Arches 0.83 0.69 0.36 0.14 0.33 0.47 Bandelier 0.54 0.40 0.23 0.14 0.17 0.31 Black Canyon 0.39 0.29 0.17 0.10 0.13 0.23 Canyonlands 1.07 0.99 0.58 0.08 0.41 0.49 Capitol Reef 0.78 0.57 0.28 0.21 0.30 0.51 Grand Canyon 0.31 0.27 0.14 0.04 0.13 0.17 Great Sand Dunes 0.21 0.14 0.10 0.07 0.04 0.11 La Garita 0.29 0.21 0.12 0.08 0.09 0.17 Maroon Bells 0.18 0.14 0.07 0.04 0.07 0.11 Mesa Verde 1.82 1.40 1.14 0.42 0.26 0.68 Pecos 0.36 0.27 0.18 0.09 0.09 0.18 Petrified Forest 0.25 0.19 0.11 0.06 0.08 0.14 San Pedro 0.73 0.58 0.39 0.15 0.19 0.34 West Elk 0.29 0.22 0.11 0.07 0.11 0.18 Weminuche 0.56 0.42 0.28 0.14 0.14 0.28 Wheeler Peak 0.26 0.20 0.13 0.06 0.07 0.13 Notes: 

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data. 2. NI = No Improvement 3. NA = Not Applicable 4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000): 

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree (w/o inj.) $12,142 Consent Decree to SCR (w/o inj.) $21,891 Pre-Consent Decree to SCR (w/o inj.) $34,033 
3/16/09 Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 14 of 148 

Table 13 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 3 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.04 0.81 0.72 0.86 1.04 

Bandelier 0.53 0.81 0.71 0.68 0.81 

Black Canyon 0.58 0.53 0.59 0.57 0.59 

Canyonlands 1.44 1.04 0.96 1.15 1.44 

Capitol Reef 1.10 0.38 0.52 0.67 1.10 

Grand Canyon 0.48 0.33 0.26 0.36 0.48 

Great Sand Dunes 0.28 0.33 0.27 0.29 0.33 

La Garita 0.40 0.44 0.43 0.42 0.44 

Maroon Bells 0.24 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 

Mesa Verde 1.92 2.18 2.14 2.08 2.18 

Pecos 0.48 0.52 0.58 0.53 0.58 

Petrified Forest 0.43 0.25 0.24 0.31 0.43 

San Pedro 0.88 1.03 0.88 0.93 1.03 

West Elk 0.38 0.42 0.38 0.39 0.42 

Weminuche 0.59 0.82 0.65 0.69 0.82 

Wheeler Peak 0.37 0.39 0.37 0.38 0.39 

Overall 0.66 2.18 

 
3/16/09 Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 15 of 148 

Table 14 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 3 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.89 0.65 0.66 0.73 0.89 

Bandelier 0.39 0.57 0.61 0.52 0.61 

Black Canyon 0.44 0.41 0.46 0.44 0.46 

Canyonlands 1.15 0.85 0.79 0.93 1.15 

Capitol Reef 0.86 0.26 0.36 0.49 0.86 

Grand Canyon 0.35 0.24 0.19 0.26 0.35 

Great Sand Dunes 0.21 0.24 0.21 0.22 0.24 

La Garita 0.29 0.33 0.33 0.32 0.33 

Maroon Bells 0.20 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.20 

Mesa Verde 1.56 1.90 1.74 1.73 1.90 

Pecos 0.35 0.36 0.42 0.38 0.42 

Petrified Forest 0.29 0.18 0.17 0.21 0.29 

San Pedro 0.70 0.81 0.72 0.74 0.81 

West Elk 0.30 0.33 0.35 0.33 0.35 

Weminuche 0.44 0.64 0.50 0.53 0.64 

Wheeler Peak 0.28 0.31 0.28 0.29 0.31 

Overall 0.52 1.90 

 
3/16/09 Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 16 of 148 

Table 15 

SCR with Inherent SO3 Removal Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 3 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.55 0.40 0.39 0.45 0.55 

Bandelier 0.23 0.34 0.36 0.31 0.36 

Black Canyon 0.23 0.23 0.27 0.24 0.27 

Canyonlands 0.71 0.49 0.52 0.57 0.71 

Capitol Reef 0.42 0.21 0.26 0.30 0.42 

Grand Canyon 0.19 0.16 0.15 0.17 0.19 

Great Sand Dunes 0.15 0.16 0.13 0.15 0.16 

La Garita 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 

Maroon Bells 0.10 0.11 0.09 0.10 0.11 

Mesa Verde 1.49 1.38 1.65 1.51 1.65 

Pecos 0.22 0.25 0.29 0.25 0.29 

Petrified Forest 0.18 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.18 

San Pedro 0.51 0.54 0.49 0.51 0.54 

West Elk 0.16 0.18 0.16 0.17 0.18 

Weminuche 0.28 0.41 0.33 0.34 0.41 

Wheeler Peak 0.20 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.20 

Overall 0.35 1.65 

 
3/16/09 Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 17 of 148 

Table 16 

Unit 3 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visib

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) 

(98th Percentile, see Note 1) Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for each Class 1 Area

Class 1 Area Pre-Consent Decree Consent Decree 

SCR with Inherent 

SO3 Removal 

Pre-Consent Decree 

to Consent Decree 

Consent Decree to 

SCR 

Pre-Consent Decre

to SCR 

Arches 1.04 0.89 0.55 0.15 0.34 0.49 Bandelier 0.81 0.61 0.36 0.20 0.25 0.45 Black Canyon 0.59 0.46 0.27 0.13 0.19 0.32 Canyonlands 1.44 1.15 0.71 0.29 0.44 0.73 Capitol Reef 1.10 0.86 0.42 0.24 0.44 0.68 Grand Canyon 0.48 0.35 0.19 0.13 0.16 0.29 Great Sand Dunes 0.33 0.24 0.16 0.09 0.08 0.17 La Garita 0.44 0.33 0.19 0.11 0.15 0.26 Maroon Bells 0.25 0.20 0.11 0.05 0.09 0.14 Mesa Verde 2.18 1.90 1.65 0.28 0.25 0.53 Pecos 0.58 0.42 0.29 0.16 0.14 0.30 Petrified Forest 0.43 0.29 0.18 0.14 0.11 0.25 San Pedro 1.03 0.81 0.54 0.22 0.27 0.49 West Elk 0.42 0.35 0.18 0.07 0.17 0.24 Weminuche 0.82 0.64 0.41 0.18 0.24 0.42 Wheeler Peak 0.39 0.31 0.20 0.08 0.11 0.19 Notes: 

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data. 2. NI = No Improvement 3. NA = Not Applicable 4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000): 

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree (w/o inj.) $13,694 Consent Decree to SCR (w/o inj.) $28,359 Pre-Consent Decree to SCR (w/o inj.) $42,053 
3/16/09 Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 18 of 148 

Table 17 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 4 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.05 0.84 0.74 0.88 1.05 

Bandelier 0.54 0.81 0.71 0.69 0.81 

Black Canyon 0.58 0.54 0.59 0.57 0.59 

Canyonlands 1.47 1.06 0.97 1.17 1.47 

Capitol Reef 1.11 0.38 0.53 0.67 1.11 

Grand Canyon 0.48 0.34 0.27 0.36 0.48 

Great Sand Dunes 0.29 0.34 0.27 0.30 0.34 

La Garita 0.40 0.45 0.43 0.43 0.45 

Maroon Bells 0.24 0.25 0.24 0.24 0.25 

Mesa Verde 1.94 2.18 2.15 2.09 2.18 

Pecos 0.48 0.52 0.59 0.53 0.59 

Petrified Forest 0.44 0.27 0.25 0.32 0.44 

San Pedro 0.89 1.04 0.88 0.94 1.04 

West Elk 0.38 0.43 0.39 0.40 0.43 

Weminuche 0.59 0.81 0.65 0.68 0.81 

Wheeler Peak 0.37 0.41 0.38 0.39 0.41 

Overall 0.67 2.18 

 
3/16/09 Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 19 of 148 

Table 18 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 4 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.88 0.65 0.63 0.72 0.88 

Bandelier 0.38 0.56 0.60 0.51 0.60 

Black Canyon 0.42 0.42 0.44 0.43 0.44 

Canyonlands 1.14 0.85 0.78 0.92 1.14 

Capitol Reef 0.86 0.26 0.35 0.49 0.86 

Grand Canyon 0.36 0.24 0.18 0.26 0.36 

Great Sand Dunes 0.21 0.23 0.21 0.22 0.23 

La Garita 0.28 0.32 0.32 0.31 0.32 

Maroon Bells 0.20 0.19 0.18 0.19 0.20 

Mesa Verde 1.55 1.89 1.73 1.72 1.89 

Pecos 0.34 0.35 0.41 0.37 0.41 

Petrified Forest 0.29 0.18 0.17 0.21 0.29 

San Pedro 0.69 0.80 0.69 0.73 0.80 

West Elk 0.30 0.33 0.33 0.32 0.33 

Weminuche 0.43 0.63 0.49 0.52 0.63 

Wheeler Peak 0.28 0.30 0.28 0.29 0.30 

Overall 0.51 1.89 

 
3/16/09 Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 20 of 148 

Table 19 

SCR with Inherent SO3 Removal Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 4 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.54 0.39 0.37 0.43 0.54 

Bandelier 0.23 0.34 0.35 0.31 0.35 

Black Canyon 0.22 0.22 0.27 0.24 0.27 

Canyonlands 0.72 0.48 0.52 0.57 0.72 

Capitol Reef 0.42 0.21 0.26 0.29 0.42 

Grand Canyon 0.18 0.16 0.15 0.16 0.18 

Great Sand Dunes 0.15 0.15 0.12 0.14 0.15 

La Garita 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 

Maroon Bells 0.10 0.11 0.09 0.10 0.11 

Mesa Verde 1.47 1.37 1.61 1.48 1.61 

Pecos 0.22 0.25 0.28 0.25 0.28 

Petrified Forest 0.18 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.18 

San Pedro 0.50 0.54 0.48 0.50 0.54 

West Elk 0.16 0.18 0.15 0.16 0.18 

Weminuche 0.27 0.39 0.32 0.33 0.39 

Wheeler Peak 0.20 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.20 

Overall 0.34 1.61 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 21 of 148 

Table 20 

Unit 4 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visib

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) 

(98th Percentile, see Note 1) Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for each Class 1 Area

Class 1 Area Pre-Consent Decree Consent Decree 

SCR with Inherent 

SO3 Removal 

Pre-Consent Decree 

to Consent Decree 

Consent Decree to 

SCR 

Pre-Consent Decre

to SCR 

Arches 1.05 0.88 0.54 0.17 0.34 0.51 Bandelier 0.81 0.60 0.35 0.21 0.25 0.46 Black Canyon 0.59 0.44 0.27 0.15 0.17 0.32 Canyonlands 1.47 1.14 0.72 0.33 0.42 0.75 Capitol Reef 1.11 0.86 0.42 0.25 0.44 0.69 Grand Canyon 0.48 0.36 0.18 0.12 0.18 0.30 Great Sand Dunes 0.34 0.23 0.15 0.11 0.08 0.19 La Garita 0.45 0.32 0.18 0.13 0.14 0.27 Maroon Bells 0.25 0.20 0.11 0.05 0.09 0.14 Mesa Verde 2.18 1.89 1.61 0.29 0.28 0.57 Pecos 0.59 0.41 0.28 0.18 0.13 0.31 Petrified Forest 0.44 0.29 0.18 0.15 0.11 0.26 San Pedro 1.04 0.80 0.54 0.24 0.27 0.51 West Elk 0.43 0.33 0.18 0.10 0.15 0.25 Weminuche 0.81 0.63 0.39 0.18 0.24 0.42 Wheeler Peak 0.41 0.30 0.20 0.11 0.11 0.22 Notes: 

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data. 2. NI = No Improvement 3. NA = Not Applicable 4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000): 

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree (w/o inj.) $13,783 Consent Decree to SCR (w/o inj.) $26,592 Pre-Consent Decree to SCR (w/o inj.) $40,375 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 22 of 148 

SCR/SNCR Hybrid with Inherent SO3 Removal
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 23 of 148 

Table 21 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Facility 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.92 1.76 1.82 1.83 1.92 

Bandelier 1.31 1.86 1.51 1.56 1.86 

Black Canyon 1.14 1.34 1.40 1.29 1.40 

Canyonlands 2.59 2.04 2.00 2.21 2.59 

Capitol Reef 1.97 1.16 1.34 1.49 1.97 

Grand Canyon 1.14 0.93 0.81 0.96 1.14 

Great Sand Dunes 0.85 1.00 0.82 0.89 1.00 

La Garita 1.15 1.30 1.14 1.20 1.30 

Maroon Bells 0.67 0.78 0.63 0.70 0.78 

Mesa Verde 4.20 4.09 4.85 4.38 4.85 

Pecos 1.40 1.33 1.26 1.33 1.40 

Petrified Forest 1.13 0.79 0.74 0.88 1.13 

San Pedro 1.78 2.37 1.96 2.04 2.37 

West Elk 0.99 1.15 0.94 1.03 1.15 

Weminuche 1.51 1.85 1.69 1.69 1.85 

Wheeler Peak 1.00 0.95 1.05 1.00 1.05 

Overall 1.53 4.85 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 24 of 148 

Table 22 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Facility 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.69 1.65 1.49 1.61 1.69 

Bandelier 1.04 1.56 1.20 1.27 1.56 

Black Canyon 0.95 1.15 1.07 1.05 1.15 

Canyonlands 2.26 1.73 1.68 1.89 2.26 

Capitol Reef 1.81 0.82 1.05 1.23 1.81 

Grand Canyon 0.97 0.76 0.57 0.77 0.97 

Great Sand Dunes 0.63 0.71 0.64 0.66 0.71 

La Garita 0.86 0.94 0.90 0.90 0.94 

Maroon Bells 0.54 0.56 0.51 0.54 0.56 

Mesa Verde 3.38 3.53 3.80 3.57 3.80 

Pecos 1.05 1.09 1.00 1.05 1.09 

Petrified Forest 0.82 0.60 0.53 0.65 0.82 

San Pedro 1.40 2.01 1.56 1.66 2.01 

West Elk 0.80 0.91 0.83 0.85 0.91 

Weminuche 1.15 1.48 1.34 1.33 1.48 

Wheeler Peak 0.75 0.86 0.89 0.83 0.89 

Overall 1.24 3.80 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 25 of 148 

Table 23 

SCR/SNCR Hybrid w/ Inherent SO3 Removal Visibility Modeling Results - Facility 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.58 1.43 1.33 1.44 1.58 

Bandelier 0.91 1.33 1.13 1.12 1.33 

Black Canyon 0.84 0.92 0.94 0.90 0.94 

Canyonlands 2.17 1.57 1.67 1.80 2.17 

Capitol Reef 1.64 0.67 0.96 1.09 1.64 

Grand Canyon 0.80 0.67 0.58 0.68 0.80 

Great Sand Dunes 0.62 0.64 0.50 0.59 0.64 

La Garita 0.70 0.78 0.75 0.74 0.78 

Maroon Bells 0.47 0.48 0.41 0.45 0.48 

Mesa Verde 4.08 3.88 4.42 4.13 4.42 

Pecos 0.84 0.86 0.90 0.87 0.90 

Petrified Forest 0.73 0.50 0.52 0.58 0.73 

San Pedro 1.42 1.80 1.57 1.60 1.80 

West Elk 0.68 0.73 0.67 0.70 0.73 

Weminuche 1.01 1.33 1.14 1.16 1.33 

Wheeler Peak 0.70 0.69 0.72 0.70 0.72 

Overall 1.16 4.42 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 26 of 148 

Table 24 

Facility Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visi

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) 

(98th Percentile, see Note 1) Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for each Class 1 Area

Class 1 Area Pre-Consent Decree Consent Decree 

SCR/SNCR Hybrid 

with Inherent SO3

Removal 

Pre-Consent Decree 

to Consent Decree 

Consent Decree to 

Hybrid 

Pre-Consent Decre

to Hybrid 

Arches 1.92 1.69 1.58 0.23 0.11 0.34 Bandelier 1.86 1.56 1.33 0.31 0.23 0.54 Black Canyon 1.40 1.15 0.94 0.26 0.21 0.46 Canyonlands 2.59 2.26 2.17 0.33 0.09 0.42 Capitol Reef 1.97 1.81 1.64 0.16 0.17 0.33 Grand Canyon 1.14 0.97 0.80 0.17 0.17 0.34 Great Sand Dunes 1.00 0.71 0.64 0.29 0.07 0.36 La Garita 1.30 0.94 0.78 0.36 0.17 0.53 Maroon Bells 0.78 0.56 0.48 0.22 0.08 0.30 Mesa Verde 4.85 3.80 4.42 1.06 NI 0.43 Pecos 1.40 1.09 0.90 0.31 0.19 0.50 Petrified Forest 1.13 0.82 0.73 0.31 0.09 0.40 San Pedro 2.37 2.01 1.80 0.36 0.21 0.57 West Elk 1.15 0.91 0.73 0.24 0.18 0.42 Weminuche 1.85 1.48 1.33 0.37 0.16 0.53 Wheeler Peak 1.05 0.89 0.72 0.16 0.17 0.33 Notes: 

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data. 2. NI = No Improvement 3. NA = Not Applicable 4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000): 

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree (w/o inj.) $51,468 Consent Decree to Hybrid (w/o inj.) $83,332 Pre-Consent Decree to Hybrid (w/o inj.) $88,628 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 27 of 148 

Table 25 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 1 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.82 0.68 0.60 0.70 0.82 

Bandelier 0.31 0.49 0.54 0.45 0.54 

Black Canyon 0.35 0.37 0.38 0.37 0.38 

Canyonlands 1.10 0.84 0.71 0.88 1.10 

Capitol Reef 0.76 0.23 0.32 0.44 0.76 

Grand Canyon 0.31 0.21 0.16 0.23 0.31 

Great Sand Dunes 0.18 0.20 0.17 0.18 0.20 

La Garita 0.26 0.28 0.29 0.28 0.29 

Maroon Bells 0.18 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.18 

Mesa Verde 1.51 1.79 1.67 1.66 1.79 

Pecos 0.29 0.31 0.35 0.32 0.35 

Petrified Forest 0.25 0.16 0.14 0.18 0.25 

San Pedro 0.61 0.73 0.63 0.66 0.73 

West Elk 0.27 0.28 0.25 0.27 0.28 

Weminuche 0.37 0.54 0.45 0.45 0.54 

Wheeler Peak 0.24 0.25 0.26 0.25 0.26 

Overall 0.47 1.79 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 28 of 148 

Table 26 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 1 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.69 0.54 0.52 0.58 0.69 

Bandelier 0.24 0.40 0.37 0.34 0.40 

Black Canyon 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.29 0.29 

Canyonlands 1.00 0.65 0.57 0.74 1.00 

Capitol Reef 0.57 0.18 0.23 0.33 0.57 

Grand Canyon 0.27 0.16 0.12 0.18 0.27 

Great Sand Dunes 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 

La Garita 0.19 0.21 0.21 0.20 0.21 

Maroon Bells 0.14 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.14 

Mesa Verde 1.35 1.40 1.27 1.34 1.40 

Pecos 0.23 0.24 0.27 0.25 0.27 

Petrified Forest 0.19 0.13 0.11 0.14 0.19 

San Pedro 0.44 0.59 0.50 0.51 0.59 

West Elk 0.22 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.22 

Weminuche 0.31 0.43 0.35 0.36 0.43 

Wheeler Peak 0.19 0.17 0.20 0.19 0.20 

Overall 0.37 1.40 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 29 of 148 

Table 27 

SCR/SNCR Hybrid with Inherent SO3 Removal Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 1 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.53 0.41 0.42 0.45 0.53 

Bandelier 0.19 0.33 0.28 0.26 0.33 

Black Canyon 0.20 0.21 0.22 0.21 0.22 

Canyonlands 0.79 0.47 0.46 0.58 0.79 

Capitol Reef 0.41 0.14 0.23 0.26 0.41 

Grand Canyon 0.20 0.14 0.12 0.15 0.20 

Great Sand Dunes 0.12 0.13 0.10 0.12 0.13 

La Garita 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 

Maroon Bells 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.09 0.10 

Mesa Verde 1.25 1.25 1.29 1.26 1.29 

Pecos 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.20 0.22 

Petrified Forest 0.16 0.10 0.11 0.12 0.16 

San Pedro 0.33 0.47 0.41 0.40 0.47 

West Elk 0.17 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.17 

Weminuche 0.24 0.35 0.29 0.29 0.35 

Wheeler Peak 0.15 0.14 0.16 0.15 0.16 

Overall 0.30 1.29 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 30 of 148 

Table 28 

Unit 1 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visib

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) 

(98th Percentile, see Note 1) Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for each Class 1 Area

Class 1 Area Pre-Consent Decree Consent Decree 

SCR/SNCR Hybrid 

with Inherent SO3

Removal 

Pre-Consent Decree 

to Consent Decree 

Consent Decree to 

Hybrid 

Pre-Consent Decre

to Hybrid 

Arches 0.82 0.69 0.53 0.13 0.16 0.29 Bandelier 0.54 0.40 0.33 0.14 0.08 0.22 Black Canyon 0.38 0.29 0.22 0.09 0.07 0.16 Canyonlands 1.10 1.00 0.79 0.10 0.21 0.31 Capitol Reef 0.76 0.57 0.41 0.19 0.16 0.35 Grand Canyon 0.31 0.27 0.20 0.04 0.07 0.11 Great Sand Dunes 0.20 0.14 0.13 0.06 0.01 0.07 La Garita 0.29 0.21 0.16 0.08 0.05 0.13 Maroon Bells 0.18 0.14 0.10 0.04 0.04 0.08 Mesa Verde 1.79 1.40 1.29 0.39 0.11 0.50 Pecos 0.35 0.27 0.22 0.08 0.05 0.13 Petrified Forest 0.25 0.19 0.16 0.06 0.03 0.09 San Pedro 0.73 0.59 0.47 0.14 0.12 0.26 West Elk 0.28 0.22 0.17 0.06 0.05 0.11 Weminuche 0.54 0.43 0.35 0.11 0.08 0.19 Wheeler Peak 0.26 0.20 0.16 0.06 0.04 0.10 Notes: 

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data. 2. NI = No Improvement 3. NA = Not Applicable 4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000): 

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree (w/o inj.) $11,849 Consent Decree to Hybrid (w/o inj.) $16,207 Pre-Consent Decree to Hybrid (w/o inj.) $17,629 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 31 of 148 

Table 29 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 2 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.83 0.64 0.58 0.68 0.83 

Bandelier 0.32 0.50 0.54 0.45 0.54 

Black Canyon 0.36 0.37 0.39 0.37 0.39 

Canyonlands 1.07 0.83 0.72 0.87 1.07 

Capitol Reef 0.78 0.23 0.31 0.44 0.78 

Grand Canyon 0.31 0.20 0.16 0.22 0.31 

Great Sand Dunes 0.19 0.21 0.17 0.19 0.21 

La Garita 0.26 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.29 

Maroon Bells 0.18 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.18 

Mesa Verde 1.49 1.82 1.66 1.66 1.82 

Pecos 0.29 0.31 0.36 0.32 0.36 

Petrified Forest 0.25 0.16 0.14 0.18 0.25 

San Pedro 0.63 0.73 0.64 0.67 0.73 

West Elk 0.27 0.29 0.26 0.27 0.29 

Weminuche 0.38 0.56 0.44 0.46 0.56 

Wheeler Peak 0.24 0.26 0.26 0.25 0.26 

Overall 0.47 1.82 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 32 of 148 

Table 30 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 2 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.69 0.54 0.52 0.58 0.69 

Bandelier 0.23 0.40 0.37 0.33 0.40 

Black Canyon 0.28 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.29 

Canyonlands 0.99 0.65 0.57 0.74 0.99 

Capitol Reef 0.57 0.18 0.23 0.33 0.57 

Grand Canyon 0.27 0.16 0.12 0.18 0.27 

Great Sand Dunes 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 

La Garita 0.19 0.21 0.21 0.20 0.21 

Maroon Bells 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.14 

Mesa Verde 1.35 1.40 1.26 1.34 1.40 

Pecos 0.23 0.24 0.27 0.25 0.27 

Petrified Forest 0.19 0.13 0.11 0.14 0.19 

San Pedro 0.44 0.58 0.50 0.51 0.58 

West Elk 0.22 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.22 

Weminuche 0.31 0.42 0.35 0.36 0.42 

Wheeler Peak 0.18 0.17 0.20 0.18 0.20 

Overall 0.37 1.40 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 33 of 148 

Table 31 

SCR/SNCR Hybrid with Inherent SO3 Removal Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 2 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.53 0.41 0.42 0.45 0.53 

Bandelier 0.19 0.32 0.27 0.26 0.32 

Black Canyon 0.20 0.21 0.22 0.21 0.22 

Canyonlands 0.79 0.47 0.46 0.57 0.79 

Capitol Reef 0.41 0.14 0.23 0.26 0.41 

Grand Canyon 0.20 0.14 0.12 0.15 0.20 

Great Sand Dunes 0.12 0.13 0.10 0.12 0.13 

La Garita 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 

Maroon Bells 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.09 0.10 

Mesa Verde 1.25 1.25 1.28 1.26 1.28 

Pecos 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.20 0.22 

Petrified Forest 0.16 0.10 0.10 0.12 0.16 

San Pedro 0.33 0.46 0.41 0.40 0.46 

West Elk 0.17 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.17 

Weminuche 0.24 0.35 0.29 0.29 0.35 

Wheeler Peak 0.15 0.14 0.16 0.15 0.16 

Overall 0.30 1.28 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 34 of 148 

Table 32 

Unit 2 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visib

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) 

(98th Percentile, see Note 1) Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for each Class 1 Area

Class 1 Area Pre-Consent Decree Consent Decree 

SCR/SNCR Hybrid 

with Inherent SO3

Removal 

Pre-Consent Decree 

to Consent Decree 

Consent Decree to 

Hybrid 

Pre-Consent Decre

to Hybrid 

Arches 0.83 0.69 0.53 0.14 0.16 0.30 Bandelier 0.54 0.40 0.32 0.14 0.08 0.22 Black Canyon 0.39 0.29 0.22 0.10 0.07 0.17 Canyonlands 1.07 0.99 0.79 0.08 0.20 0.28 Capitol Reef 0.78 0.57 0.41 0.21 0.16 0.37 Grand Canyon 0.31 0.27 0.20 0.04 0.07 0.11 Great Sand Dunes 0.21 0.14 0.13 0.07 0.01 0.08 La Garita 0.29 0.21 0.16 0.08 0.05 0.13 Maroon Bells 0.18 0.14 0.10 0.04 0.04 0.08 Mesa Verde 1.82 1.40 1.28 0.42 0.12 0.54 Pecos 0.36 0.27 0.22 0.09 0.05 0.14 Petrified Forest 0.25 0.19 0.16 0.06 0.03 0.09 San Pedro 0.73 0.58 0.46 0.15 0.12 0.27 West Elk 0.29 0.22 0.17 0.07 0.05 0.12 Weminuche 0.56 0.42 0.35 0.14 0.07 0.21 Wheeler Peak 0.26 0.20 0.16 0.06 0.04 0.10 Notes: 

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data. 2. NI = No Improvement 3. NA = Not Applicable 4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000): 

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree (w/o inj.) $12,142 Consent Decree to Hybrid (w/o inj.) $16,670 Pre-Consent Decree to Hybrid (w/o inj.) $18,048 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 35 of 148 

Table 33 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 3 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.04 0.81 0.72 0.86 1.04 

Bandelier 0.53 0.81 0.71 0.68 0.81 

Black Canyon 0.58 0.53 0.59 0.57 0.59 

Canyonlands 1.44 1.04 0.96 1.15 1.44 

Capitol Reef 1.10 0.38 0.52 0.67 1.10 

Grand Canyon 0.48 0.33 0.26 0.36 0.48 

Great Sand Dunes 0.28 0.33 0.27 0.29 0.33 

La Garita 0.40 0.44 0.43 0.42 0.44 

Maroon Bells 0.24 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 

Mesa Verde 1.92 2.18 2.14 2.08 2.18 

Pecos 0.48 0.52 0.58 0.53 0.58 

Petrified Forest 0.43 0.25 0.24 0.31 0.43 

San Pedro 0.88 1.03 0.88 0.93 1.03 

West Elk 0.38 0.42 0.38 0.39 0.42 

Weminuche 0.59 0.82 0.65 0.69 0.82 

Wheeler Peak 0.37 0.39 0.37 0.38 0.39 

Overall 0.66 2.18 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 36 of 148 

Table 34 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 3 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.89 0.65 0.66 0.73 0.89 

Bandelier 0.39 0.57 0.61 0.52 0.61 

Black Canyon 0.44 0.41 0.46 0.44 0.46 

Canyonlands 1.15 0.85 0.79 0.93 1.15 

Capitol Reef 0.86 0.26 0.36 0.49 0.86 

Grand Canyon 0.35 0.24 0.19 0.26 0.35 

Great Sand Dunes 0.21 0.24 0.21 0.22 0.24 

La Garita 0.29 0.33 0.33 0.32 0.33 

Maroon Bells 0.20 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.20 

Mesa Verde 1.56 1.90 1.74 1.73 1.90 

Pecos 0.35 0.36 0.42 0.38 0.42 

Petrified Forest 0.29 0.18 0.17 0.21 0.29 

San Pedro 0.70 0.81 0.72 0.74 0.81 

West Elk 0.30 0.33 0.35 0.33 0.35 

Weminuche 0.44 0.64 0.50 0.53 0.64 

Wheeler Peak 0.28 0.31 0.28 0.29 0.31 

Overall 0.52 1.90 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 37 of 148 

Table 35 

SCR/SNCR Hybrid with Inherent SO3 Removal Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 3 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.75 0.52 0.54 0.60 0.75 

Bandelier 0.32 0.46 0.46 0.41 0.46 

Black Canyon 0.33 0.32 0.37 0.34 0.37 

Canyonlands 0.96 0.66 0.67 0.76 0.96 

Capitol Reef 0.63 0.21 0.31 0.38 0.63 

Grand Canyon 0.26 0.21 0.18 0.22 0.26 

Great Sand Dunes 0.20 0.21 0.16 0.19 0.21 

La Garita 0.26 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.26 

Maroon Bells 0.15 0.15 0.13 0.14 0.15 

Mesa Verde 1.60 1.67 1.81 1.69 1.81 

Pecos 0.27 0.30 0.36 0.31 0.36 

Petrified Forest 0.26 0.16 0.16 0.19 0.26 

San Pedro 0.55 0.66 0.59 0.60 0.66 

West Elk 0.23 0.26 0.25 0.24 0.26 

Weminuche 0.35 0.52 0.40 0.43 0.52 

Wheeler Peak 0.23 0.24 0.23 0.23 0.24 

Overall 0.44 1.81 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 38 of 148 

Table 36 

Unit 3 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visib

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) 

(98th Percentile, see Note 1) Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for each Class 1 Area

Class 1 Area Pre-Consent Decree Consent Decree 

SCR/SNCR Hybrid 

with Inherent SO3

Removal 

Pre-Consent Decree 

to Consent Decree 

Consent Decree to 

Hybrid 

Pre-Consent Decre

to Hybrid 

Arches 1.04 0.89 0.75 0.15 0.14 0.29 Bandelier 0.81 0.61 0.46 0.20 0.15 0.35 Black Canyon 0.59 0.46 0.37 0.13 0.09 0.22 Canyonlands 1.44 1.15 0.96 0.29 0.19 0.48 Capitol Reef 1.10 0.86 0.63 0.24 0.23 0.47 Grand Canyon 0.48 0.35 0.26 0.13 0.09 0.22 Great Sand Dunes 0.33 0.24 0.21 0.09 0.04 0.13 La Garita 0.44 0.33 0.26 0.11 0.07 0.18 Maroon Bells 0.25 0.20 0.15 0.05 0.05 0.10 Mesa Verde 2.18 1.90 1.81 0.28 0.09 0.37 Pecos 0.58 0.42 0.36 0.16 0.06 0.22 Petrified Forest 0.43 0.29 0.26 0.14 0.04 0.18 San Pedro 1.03 0.81 0.66 0.22 0.15 0.37 West Elk 0.42 0.35 0.26 0.07 0.10 0.17 Weminuche 0.82 0.64 0.52 0.18 0.12 0.30 Wheeler Peak 0.39 0.31 0.24 0.08 0.07 0.15 Notes: 

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data. 2. NI = No Improvement 3. NA = Not Applicable 4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000): 

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree (w/o inj.) $13,694 Consent Decree to Hybrid (w/o inj.) $25,606 Pre-Consent Decree to Hybrid (w/o inj.) $26,846 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 39 of 148 

Table 37 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 4 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.05 0.84 0.74 0.88 1.05 

Bandelier 0.54 0.81 0.71 0.69 0.81 

Black Canyon 0.58 0.54 0.59 0.57 0.59 

Canyonlands 1.47 1.06 0.97 1.17 1.47 

Capitol Reef 1.11 0.38 0.53 0.67 1.11 

Grand Canyon 0.48 0.34 0.27 0.36 0.48 

Great Sand Dunes 0.29 0.34 0.27 0.30 0.34 

La Garita 0.40 0.45 0.43 0.43 0.45 

Maroon Bells 0.24 0.25 0.24 0.24 0.25 

Mesa Verde 1.94 2.18 2.15 2.09 2.18 

Pecos 0.48 0.52 0.59 0.53 0.59 

Petrified Forest 0.44 0.27 0.25 0.32 0.44 

San Pedro 0.89 1.04 0.88 0.94 1.04 

West Elk 0.38 0.43 0.39 0.40 0.43 

Weminuche 0.59 0.81 0.65 0.68 0.81 

Wheeler Peak 0.37 0.41 0.38 0.39 0.41 

Overall 0.67 2.18 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 40 of 148 

Table 38 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 4 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.88 0.65 0.63 0.72 0.88 

Bandelier 0.38 0.56 0.60 0.51 0.60 

Black Canyon 0.42 0.42 0.44 0.43 0.44 

Canyonlands 1.14 0.85 0.78 0.92 1.14 

Capitol Reef 0.86 0.26 0.35 0.49 0.86 

Grand Canyon 0.36 0.24 0.18 0.26 0.36 

Great Sand Dunes 0.21 0.23 0.21 0.22 0.23 

La Garita 0.28 0.32 0.32 0.31 0.32 

Maroon Bells 0.20 0.19 0.18 0.19 0.20 

Mesa Verde 1.55 1.89 1.73 1.72 1.89 

Pecos 0.34 0.35 0.41 0.37 0.41 

Petrified Forest 0.29 0.18 0.17 0.21 0.29 

San Pedro 0.69 0.80 0.69 0.73 0.80 

West Elk 0.30 0.33 0.33 0.32 0.33 

Weminuche 0.43 0.63 0.49 0.52 0.63 

Wheeler Peak 0.28 0.30 0.28 0.29 0.30 

Overall 0.51 1.89 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 41 of 148 

Table 39 

SCR/SNCR Hybrid with Inherent SO3 Removal Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 4 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.74 0.52 0.51 0.59 0.74 

Bandelier 0.31 0.45 0.46 0.40 0.46 

Black Canyon 0.33 0.30 0.36 0.33 0.36 

Canyonlands 0.97 0.65 0.66 0.76 0.97 

Capitol Reef 0.64 0.21 0.31 0.38 0.64 

Grand Canyon 0.25 0.20 0.18 0.21 0.25 

Great Sand Dunes 0.19 0.20 0.15 0.18 0.20 

La Garita 0.25 0.25 0.24 0.25 0.25 

Maroon Bells 0.15 0.15 0.13 0.14 0.15 

Mesa Verde 1.58 1.66 1.79 1.67 1.79 

Pecos 0.27 0.30 0.36 0.31 0.36 

Petrified Forest 0.25 0.16 0.16 0.19 0.25 

San Pedro 0.54 0.66 0.58 0.59 0.66 

West Elk 0.23 0.25 0.24 0.24 0.25 

Weminuche 0.35 0.51 0.40 0.42 0.51 

Wheeler Peak 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 

Overall 0.43 1.79 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 42 of 148 

Table 40 

Unit 4 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visib

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) 

(98th Percentile, see Note 1) Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for each Class 1 Area

Class 1 Area Pre-Consent Decree Consent Decree 

SCR/SNCR Hybrid 

with Inherent SO3

Removal 

Pre-Consent Decree 

to Consent Decree 

Consent Decree to 

Hybrid 

Pre-Consent Decre

to Hybrid 

Arches 1.05 0.88 0.74 0.17 0.14 0.31 Bandelier 0.81 0.60 0.46 0.21 0.15 0.36 Black Canyon 0.59 0.44 0.36 0.15 0.08 0.23 Canyonlands 1.47 1.14 0.97 0.33 0.17 0.50 Capitol Reef 1.11 0.86 0.64 0.25 0.22 0.47 Grand Canyon 0.48 0.36 0.25 0.12 0.11 0.23 Great Sand Dunes 0.34 0.23 0.20 0.11 0.03 0.14 La Garita 0.45 0.32 0.25 0.13 0.07 0.20 Maroon Bells 0.25 0.20 0.15 0.05 0.05 0.10 Mesa Verde 2.18 1.89 1.79 0.29 0.10 0.39 Pecos 0.59 0.41 0.36 0.18 0.05 0.23 Petrified Forest 0.44 0.29 0.25 0.15 0.04 0.19 San Pedro 1.04 0.80 0.66 0.24 0.15 0.39 West Elk 0.43 0.33 0.25 0.10 0.08 0.18 Weminuche 0.81 0.63 0.51 0.18 0.12 0.30 Wheeler Peak 0.41 0.30 0.23 0.11 0.07 0.18 Notes: 

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data. 2. NI = No Improvement 3. NA = Not Applicable 4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000): 

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree (w/o inj.) $13,783 Consent Decree to Hybrid (w/o inj.) $24,849 Pre-Consent Decree to Hybrid (w/o inj.) $26,105 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 43 of 148 

SCR with Inherent SO3 Removal and Sorbent Injection
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 44 of 148 

Table 41 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Facility 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.92 1.76 1.82 1.83 1.92 

Bandelier 1.31 1.86 1.51 1.56 1.86 

Black Canyon 1.14 1.34 1.40 1.29 1.40 

Canyonlands 2.59 2.04 2.00 2.21 2.59 

Capitol Reef 1.97 1.16 1.34 1.49 1.97 

Grand Canyon 1.14 0.93 0.81 0.96 1.14 

Great Sand Dunes 0.85 1.00 0.82 0.89 1.00 

La Garita 1.15 1.30 1.14 1.20 1.30 

Maroon Bells 0.67 0.78 0.63 0.70 0.78 

Mesa Verde 4.20 4.09 4.85 4.38 4.85 

Pecos 1.40 1.33 1.26 1.33 1.40 

Petrified Forest 1.13 0.79 0.74 0.88 1.13 

San Pedro 1.78 2.37 1.96 2.04 2.37 

West Elk 0.99 1.15 0.94 1.03 1.15 

Weminuche 1.51 1.85 1.69 1.69 1.85 

Wheeler Peak 1.00 0.95 1.05 1.00 1.05 

Overall 1.53 4.85 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 45 of 148 

Table 42 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Facility 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.69 1.65 1.49 1.61 1.69 

Bandelier 1.04 1.56 1.20 1.27 1.56 

Black Canyon 0.95 1.15 1.07 1.05 1.15 

Canyonlands 2.26 1.73 1.68 1.89 2.26 

Capitol Reef 1.81 0.82 1.05 1.23 1.81 

Grand Canyon 0.97 0.76 0.57 0.77 0.97 

Great Sand Dunes 0.63 0.71 0.64 0.66 0.71 

La Garita 0.86 0.94 0.90 0.90 0.94 

Maroon Bells 0.54 0.56 0.51 0.54 0.56 

Mesa Verde 3.38 3.53 3.80 3.57 3.80 

Pecos 1.05 1.09 1.00 1.05 1.09 

Petrified Forest 0.82 0.60 0.53 0.65 0.82 

San Pedro 1.40 2.01 1.56 1.66 2.01 

West Elk 0.80 0.91 0.83 0.85 0.91 

Weminuche 1.15 1.48 1.34 1.33 1.48 

Wheeler Peak 0.75 0.86 0.89 0.83 0.89 

Overall 1.24 3.80 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 46 of 148 

Table 43 

SCR with Inherent SO3 Removal and Sorbent Injection Visibility Modeling Results - Facility 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.10 0.86 0.93 0.96 1.10 

Bandelier 0.59 0.80 0.77 0.72 0.80 

Black Canyon 0.54 0.55 0.63 0.57 0.63 

Canyonlands 1.59 1.19 1.17 1.32 1.59 

Capitol Reef 1.08 0.58 0.69 0.78 1.08 

Grand Canyon 0.53 0.46 0.39 0.46 0.53 

Great Sand Dunes 0.40 0.33 0.33 0.35 0.40 

La Garita 0.41 0.42 0.45 0.43 0.45 

Maroon Bells 0.27 0.28 0.23 0.26 0.28 

Mesa Verde 2.28 2.46 2.39 2.37 2.46 

Pecos 0.57 0.56 0.66 0.60 0.66 

Petrified Forest 0.48 0.41 0.41 0.43 0.48 

San Pedro 1.04 1.13 1.09 1.09 1.13 

West Elk 0.43 0.41 0.40 0.41 0.43 

Weminuche 0.57 0.90 0.65 0.70 0.90 

Wheeler Peak 0.50 0.44 0.46 0.47 0.50 

Overall 0.75 2.46 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 47 of 148 

Table 44 

Facility Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visi

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) 

(98th Percentile, see Note 1) Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for each Class 1 Are

Class 1 Area Pre-Consent Decree Consent Decree 

SCR with Inherent SO3

Removal and Sorbent 

Injection 

Pre-Consent Decree 

to Consent Decree 

Consent Decree to 

SCR 

Pre-Consent Decr

to SCR 

Arches 1.92 1.69 1.10 0.23 0.59 0.82 Bandelier 1.86 1.56 0.80 0.31 0.75 1.06 Black Canyon 1.40 1.15 0.63 0.26 0.52 0.78 Canyonlands 2.59 2.26 1.59 0.33 0.67 1.00 Capitol Reef 1.97 1.81 1.08 0.16 0.73 0.89 Grand Canyon 1.14 0.97 0.53 0.17 0.44 0.61 Great Sand Dunes 1.00 0.71 0.40 0.29 0.31 0.60 La Garita 1.30 0.94 0.45 0.36 0.49 0.85 Maroon Bells 0.78 0.56 0.28 0.22 0.28 0.50 Mesa Verde 4.85 3.80 2.46 1.06 1.34 2.40 Pecos 1.40 1.09 0.66 0.31 0.43 0.74 Petrified Forest 1.13 0.82 0.48 0.31 0.34 0.65 San Pedro 2.37 2.01 1.13 0.36 0.88 1.24 West Elk 1.15 0.91 0.43 0.24 0.49 0.72 Weminuche 1.85 1.48 0.90 0.37 0.59 0.96 Wheeler Peak 1.05 0.89 0.50 0.16 0.40 0.56 Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data. 2. NI = No Improvement 3. NA = Not Applicable 4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000): 

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree (w/o inj.) $51,468 Consent Decree to SCR (w/ inj.) $104,649 Pre-Consent Decree to SCR (w/ inj.) $156,117 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 48 of 148 

Table 45 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 1 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.82 0.68 0.60 0.70 0.82 

Bandelier 0.31 0.49 0.54 0.45 0.54 

Black Canyon 0.35 0.37 0.38 0.37 0.38 

Canyonlands 1.10 0.84 0.71 0.88 1.10 

Capitol Reef 0.76 0.23 0.32 0.44 0.76 

Grand Canyon 0.31 0.21 0.16 0.23 0.31 

Great Sand Dunes 0.18 0.20 0.17 0.18 0.20 

La Garita 0.26 0.28 0.29 0.28 0.29 

Maroon Bells 0.18 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.18 

Mesa Verde 1.51 1.79 1.67 1.66 1.79 

Pecos 0.29 0.31 0.35 0.32 0.35 

Petrified Forest 0.25 0.16 0.14 0.18 0.25 

San Pedro 0.61 0.73 0.63 0.66 0.73 

West Elk 0.27 0.28 0.25 0.27 0.28 

Weminuche 0.37 0.54 0.45 0.45 0.54 

Wheeler Peak 0.24 0.25 0.26 0.25 0.26 

Overall 0.47 1.79 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 49 of 148 

Table 46 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 1 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.69 0.54 0.52 0.58 0.69 

Bandelier 0.24 0.40 0.37 0.34 0.40 

Black Canyon 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.29 0.29 

Canyonlands 1.00 0.65 0.57 0.74 1.00 

Capitol Reef 0.57 0.18 0.23 0.33 0.57 

Grand Canyon 0.27 0.16 0.12 0.18 0.27 

Great Sand Dunes 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 

La Garita 0.19 0.21 0.21 0.20 0.21 

Maroon Bells 0.14 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.14 

Mesa Verde 1.35 1.40 1.27 1.34 1.40 

Pecos 0.23 0.24 0.27 0.25 0.27 

Petrified Forest 0.19 0.13 0.11 0.14 0.19 

San Pedro 0.44 0.59 0.50 0.51 0.59 

West Elk 0.22 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.22 

Weminuche 0.31 0.43 0.35 0.36 0.43 

Wheeler Peak 0.19 0.17 0.20 0.19 0.20 

Overall 0.37 1.40 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 50 of 148 

Table 47 

SCR with Inherent SO3 Removal and Sorbent Injection Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 1 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.28 0.22 0.25 0.25 0.28 

Bandelier 0.12 0.19 0.17 0.16 0.19 

Black Canyon 0.11 0.11 0.13 0.12 0.13 

Canyonlands 0.48 0.25 0.30 0.34 0.48 

Capitol Reef 0.24 0.12 0.15 0.17 0.24 

Grand Canyon 0.11 0.10 0.08 0.10 0.11 

Great Sand Dunes 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 

La Garita 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.08 0.09 

Maroon Bells 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 

Mesa Verde 0.68 0.73 0.61 0.67 0.73 

Pecos 0.11 0.12 0.15 0.13 0.15 

Petrified Forest 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.09 

San Pedro 0.22 0.30 0.23 0.25 0.30 

West Elk 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 

Weminuche 0.12 0.21 0.13 0.15 0.21 

Wheeler Peak 0.10 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 

Overall 0.18 0.73 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 51 of 148 

Table 48 

Unit 1 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visib

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) 

(98th Percentile, see Note 1) Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for each Class 1 Ar

Class 1 Area Pre-Consent Decree Consent Decree 

SCR with Inherent SO3

Removal and Sorbent 

Injection 

Pre-Consent Decree 

to Consent Decree 

Consent Decree to 

SCR 

Pre-Consent Dec

to SCR 

Arches 0.82 0.69 0.28 0.13 0.41 0.54 Bandelier 0.54 0.40 0.19 0.14 0.21 0.35 Black Canyon 0.38 0.29 0.13 0.09 0.16 0.25 Canyonlands 1.10 1.00 0.48 0.10 0.52 0.62 Capitol Reef 0.76 0.57 0.24 0.19 0.33 0.52 Grand Canyon 0.31 0.27 0.11 0.04 0.16 0.20 Great Sand Dunes 0.20 0.14 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.12 La Garita 0.29 0.21 0.09 0.08 0.12 0.20 Maroon Bells 0.18 0.14 0.05 0.04 0.09 0.13 Mesa Verde 1.79 1.40 0.73 0.39 0.67 1.06 Pecos 0.35 0.27 0.15 0.08 0.12 0.20 Petrified Forest 0.25 0.19 0.09 0.06 0.10 0.16 San Pedro 0.73 0.59 0.30 0.14 0.29 0.43 West Elk 0.28 0.22 0.09 0.06 0.13 0.19 Weminuche 0.54 0.43 0.21 0.11 0.22 0.33 Wheeler Peak 0.26 0.20 0.10 0.06 0.10 0.16 Notes: 

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data. 2. NI = No Improvement 3. NA = Not Applicable 4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000): 

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree (w/o inj.) $11,849 Consent Decree to SCR (w/ inj.) $21,998 Pre-Consent Decree to SCR (w/ inj.) $33,847 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 52 of 148 

Table 49 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 2 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.83 0.64 0.58 0.68 0.83 

Bandelier 0.32 0.50 0.54 0.45 0.54 

Black Canyon 0.36 0.37 0.39 0.37 0.39 

Canyonlands 1.07 0.83 0.72 0.87 1.07 

Capitol Reef 0.78 0.23 0.31 0.44 0.78 

Grand Canyon 0.31 0.20 0.16 0.22 0.31 

Great Sand Dunes 0.19 0.21 0.17 0.19 0.21 

La Garita 0.26 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.29 

Maroon Bells 0.18 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.18 

Mesa Verde 1.49 1.82 1.66 1.66 1.82 

Pecos 0.29 0.31 0.36 0.32 0.36 

Petrified Forest 0.25 0.16 0.14 0.18 0.25 

San Pedro 0.63 0.73 0.64 0.67 0.73 

West Elk 0.27 0.29 0.26 0.27 0.29 

Weminuche 0.38 0.56 0.44 0.46 0.56 

Wheeler Peak 0.24 0.26 0.26 0.25 0.26 

Overall 0.47 1.82 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 53 of 148 

Table 50 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 2 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.69 0.54 0.52 0.58 0.69 

Bandelier 0.23 0.40 0.37 0.33 0.40 

Black Canyon 0.28 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.29 

Canyonlands 0.99 0.65 0.57 0.74 0.99 

Capitol Reef 0.57 0.18 0.23 0.33 0.57 

Grand Canyon 0.27 0.16 0.12 0.18 0.27 

Great Sand Dunes 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 

La Garita 0.19 0.21 0.21 0.20 0.21 

Maroon Bells 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.14 

Mesa Verde 1.35 1.40 1.26 1.34 1.40 

Pecos 0.23 0.24 0.27 0.25 0.27 

Petrified Forest 0.19 0.13 0.11 0.14 0.19 

San Pedro 0.44 0.58 0.50 0.51 0.58 

West Elk 0.22 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.22 

Weminuche 0.31 0.42 0.35 0.36 0.42 

Wheeler Peak 0.18 0.17 0.20 0.18 0.20 

Overall 0.37 1.40 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 54 of 148 

Table 51 

SCR with Inherent SO3 Removal and Sorbent Injection Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 2 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.28 0.22 0.25 0.25 0.28 

Bandelier 0.12 0.19 0.17 0.16 0.19 

Black Canyon 0.11 0.11 0.13 0.12 0.13 

Canyonlands 0.48 0.25 0.30 0.34 0.48 

Capitol Reef 0.24 0.12 0.15 0.17 0.24 

Grand Canyon 0.11 0.10 0.08 0.09 0.11 

Great Sand Dunes 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 

La Garita 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.08 0.09 

Maroon Bells 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 

Mesa Verde 0.67 0.72 0.61 0.67 0.72 

Pecos 0.11 0.12 0.15 0.13 0.15 

Petrified Forest 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.09 

San Pedro 0.22 0.30 0.23 0.25 0.30 

West Elk 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 

Weminuche 0.12 0.21 0.13 0.15 0.21 

Wheeler Peak 0.10 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 

Overall 0.17 0.72 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 55 of 148 

Table 52 

Unit 2 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visib

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) 

(98th Percentile, see Note 1) Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for each Class 1 Ar

Class 1 Area Pre-Consent Decree Consent Decree 

SCR with Inherent SO3

Removal and Sorbent 

Injection 

Pre-Consent Decree 

to Consent Decree 

Consent Decree to 

SCR 

Pre-Consent Dec

to SCR 

Arches 0.83 0.69 0.28 0.14 0.41 0.55 Bandelier 0.54 0.40 0.19 0.14 0.22 0.36 Black Canyon 0.39 0.29 0.13 0.10 0.16 0.26 Canyonlands 1.07 0.99 0.48 0.08 0.51 0.59 Capitol Reef 0.78 0.57 0.24 0.21 0.33 0.54 Grand Canyon 0.31 0.27 0.11 0.04 0.16 0.20 Great Sand Dunes 0.21 0.14 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.13 La Garita 0.29 0.21 0.09 0.08 0.12 0.20 Maroon Bells 0.18 0.14 0.05 0.04 0.09 0.13 Mesa Verde 1.82 1.40 0.72 0.42 0.68 1.10 Pecos 0.36 0.27 0.15 0.09 0.12 0.21 Petrified Forest 0.25 0.19 0.09 0.06 0.10 0.16 San Pedro 0.73 0.58 0.30 0.15 0.29 0.44 West Elk 0.29 0.22 0.09 0.07 0.13 0.20 Weminuche 0.56 0.42 0.21 0.14 0.21 0.35 Wheeler Peak 0.26 0.20 0.10 0.06 0.10 0.16 Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data. 2. NI = No Improvement 3. NA = Not Applicable 4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000): 

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree (w/o inj.) $12,142 Consent Decree to SCR (w/ inj.) $23,364 Pre-Consent Decree to SCR (w/ inj.) $35,506 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 56 of 148 

Table 53 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 3 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.04 0.81 0.72 0.86 1.04 

Bandelier 0.53 0.81 0.71 0.68 0.81 

Black Canyon 0.58 0.53 0.59 0.57 0.59 

Canyonlands 1.44 1.04 0.96 1.15 1.44 

Capitol Reef 1.10 0.38 0.52 0.67 1.10 

Grand Canyon 0.48 0.33 0.26 0.36 0.48 

Great Sand Dunes 0.28 0.33 0.27 0.29 0.33 

La Garita 0.40 0.44 0.43 0.42 0.44 

Maroon Bells 0.24 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 

Mesa Verde 1.92 2.18 2.14 2.08 2.18 

Pecos 0.48 0.52 0.58 0.53 0.58 

Petrified Forest 0.43 0.25 0.24 0.31 0.43 

San Pedro 0.88 1.03 0.88 0.93 1.03 

West Elk 0.38 0.42 0.38 0.39 0.42 

Weminuche 0.59 0.82 0.65 0.69 0.82 

Wheeler Peak 0.37 0.39 0.37 0.38 0.39 

Overall 0.66 2.18 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 57 of 148 

Table 54 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 3 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.89 0.65 0.66 0.73 0.89 

Bandelier 0.39 0.57 0.61 0.52 0.61 

Black Canyon 0.44 0.41 0.46 0.44 0.46 

Canyonlands 1.15 0.85 0.79 0.93 1.15 

Capitol Reef 0.86 0.26 0.36 0.49 0.86 

Grand Canyon 0.35 0.24 0.19 0.26 0.35 

Great Sand Dunes 0.21 0.24 0.21 0.22 0.24 

La Garita 0.29 0.33 0.33 0.32 0.33 

Maroon Bells 0.20 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.20 

Mesa Verde 1.56 1.90 1.74 1.73 1.90 

Pecos 0.35 0.36 0.42 0.38 0.42 

Petrified Forest 0.29 0.18 0.17 0.21 0.29 

San Pedro 0.70 0.81 0.72 0.74 0.81 

West Elk 0.30 0.33 0.35 0.33 0.35 

Weminuche 0.44 0.64 0.50 0.53 0.64 

Wheeler Peak 0.28 0.31 0.28 0.29 0.31 

Overall 0.52 1.90 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 58 of 148 

Table 55 

SCR with Inherent SO3 Removal and Sorbent Injection Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 3 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.43 0.28 0.29 0.33 0.43 

Bandelier 0.19 0.26 0.25 0.23 0.26 

Black Canyon 0.17 0.17 0.20 0.18 0.20 

Canyonlands 0.59 0.37 0.40 0.45 0.59 

Capitol Reef 0.35 0.18 0.21 0.25 0.35 

Grand Canyon 0.17 0.14 0.12 0.14 0.17 

Great Sand Dunes 0.13 0.11 0.10 0.11 0.13 

La Garita 0.14 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.14 

Maroon Bells 0.08 0.09 0.07 0.08 0.09 

Mesa Verde 0.87 1.01 0.94 0.94 1.01 

Pecos 0.18 0.18 0.23 0.20 0.23 

Petrified Forest 0.15 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.15 

San Pedro 0.36 0.38 0.37 0.37 0.38 

West Elk 0.13 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.14 

Weminuche 0.20 0.27 0.20 0.22 0.27 

Wheeler Peak 0.16 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.16 

Overall 0.25 1.01 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 59 of 148 

Table 56 

Unit 3 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visib

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) 

(98th Percentile, see Note 1) Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for each Class 1 Are

Class 1 Area Pre-Consent Decree Consent Decree 

SCR with Inherent SO3

Removal and Sorbent 

Injection 

Pre-Consent Decree 

to Consent Decree 

Consent Decree to 

SCR 

Pre-Consent Dec

to SCR 

Arches 1.04 0.89 0.43 0.15 0.46 0.61 Bandelier 0.81 0.61 0.26 0.20 0.35 0.55 Black Canyon 0.59 0.46 0.20 0.13 0.26 0.39 Canyonlands 1.44 1.15 0.59 0.29 0.56 0.85 Capitol Reef 1.10 0.86 0.35 0.24 0.51 0.75 Grand Canyon 0.48 0.35 0.17 0.13 0.19 0.32 Great Sand Dunes 0.33 0.24 0.13 0.09 0.11 0.20 La Garita 0.44 0.33 0.14 0.11 0.19 0.30 Maroon Bells 0.25 0.20 0.09 0.05 0.11 0.16 Mesa Verde 2.18 1.90 1.01 0.28 0.89 1.17 Pecos 0.58 0.42 0.23 0.16 0.19 0.35 Petrified Forest 0.43 0.29 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.28 San Pedro 1.03 0.81 0.38 0.22 0.43 0.65 West Elk 0.42 0.35 0.14 0.07 0.21 0.28 Weminuche 0.82 0.64 0.27 0.18 0.37 0.55 Wheeler Peak 0.39 0.31 0.16 0.08 0.15 0.23 Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data. 2. NI = No Improvement 3. NA = Not Applicable 4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000): 

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree (w/o inj.) $13,694 Consent Decree to SCR (w/ inj.) $30,527 Pre-Consent Decree to SCR (w/ inj.) $44,221 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 60 of 148 

Table 57 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 4 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.05 0.84 0.74 0.88 1.05 

Bandelier 0.54 0.81 0.71 0.69 0.81 

Black Canyon 0.58 0.54 0.59 0.57 0.59 

Canyonlands 1.47 1.06 0.97 1.17 1.47 

Capitol Reef 1.11 0.38 0.53 0.67 1.11 

Grand Canyon 0.48 0.34 0.27 0.36 0.48 

Great Sand Dunes 0.29 0.34 0.27 0.30 0.34 

La Garita 0.40 0.45 0.43 0.43 0.45 

Maroon Bells 0.24 0.25 0.24 0.24 0.25 

Mesa Verde 1.94 2.18 2.15 2.09 2.18 

Pecos 0.48 0.52 0.59 0.53 0.59 

Petrified Forest 0.44 0.27 0.25 0.32 0.44 

San Pedro 0.89 1.04 0.88 0.94 1.04 

West Elk 0.38 0.43 0.39 0.40 0.43 

Weminuche 0.59 0.81 0.65 0.68 0.81 

Wheeler Peak 0.37 0.41 0.38 0.39 0.41 

Overall 0.67 2.18 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 61 of 148 

Table 58 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 4 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.88 0.65 0.63 0.72 0.88 

Bandelier 0.38 0.56 0.60 0.51 0.60 

Black Canyon 0.42 0.42 0.44 0.43 0.44 

Canyonlands 1.14 0.85 0.78 0.92 1.14 

Capitol Reef 0.86 0.26 0.35 0.49 0.86 

Grand Canyon 0.36 0.24 0.18 0.26 0.36 

Great Sand Dunes 0.21 0.23 0.21 0.22 0.23 

La Garita 0.28 0.32 0.32 0.31 0.32 

Maroon Bells 0.20 0.19 0.18 0.19 0.20 

Mesa Verde 1.55 1.89 1.73 1.72 1.89 

Pecos 0.34 0.35 0.41 0.37 0.41 

Petrified Forest 0.29 0.18 0.17 0.21 0.29 

San Pedro 0.69 0.80 0.69 0.73 0.80 

West Elk 0.30 0.33 0.33 0.32 0.33 

Weminuche 0.43 0.63 0.49 0.52 0.63 

Wheeler Peak 0.28 0.30 0.28 0.29 0.30 

Overall 0.51 1.89 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 62 of 148 

Table 59 

SCR with Inherent SO3 Removal and Sorbent Injection Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 4 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.42 0.27 0.29 0.33 0.42 

Bandelier 0.18 0.26 0.25 0.23 0.26 

Black Canyon 0.17 0.17 0.20 0.18 0.20 

Canyonlands 0.60 0.37 0.39 0.45 0.60 

Capitol Reef 0.35 0.18 0.20 0.24 0.35 

Grand Canyon 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.14 0.16 

Great Sand Dunes 0.12 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.12 

La Garita 0.14 0.13 0.14 0.13 0.14 

Maroon Bells 0.08 0.09 0.07 0.08 0.09 

Mesa Verde 0.86 0.99 0.92 0.93 0.99 

Pecos 0.18 0.17 0.23 0.19 0.23 

Petrified Forest 0.15 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.15 

San Pedro 0.35 0.38 0.37 0.36 0.38 

West Elk 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 

Weminuche 0.19 0.26 0.20 0.22 0.26 

Wheeler Peak 0.16 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.16 

Overall 0.25 0.99 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 63 of 148 

Table 60 

Unit 4 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visib

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) 

(98th Percentile, see Note 1) Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for each Class 1 Ar

Class 1 Area Pre-Consent Decree Consent Decree 

SCR with Inherent SO3

Removal and Sorbent 

Injection 

Pre-Consent Decree 

to Consent Decree 

Consent Decree to 

SCR 

Pre-Consent Dec

to SCR 

Arches 1.05 0.88 0.42 0.17 0.46 0.63 Bandelier 0.81 0.60 0.26 0.21 0.34 0.55 Black Canyon 0.59 0.44 0.20 0.15 0.24 0.39 Canyonlands 1.47 1.14 0.60 0.33 0.54 0.87 Capitol Reef 1.11 0.86 0.35 0.25 0.51 0.76 Grand Canyon 0.48 0.36 0.16 0.12 0.20 0.32 Great Sand Dunes 0.34 0.23 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.22 La Garita 0.45 0.32 0.14 0.13 0.18 0.31 Maroon Bells 0.25 0.20 0.09 0.05 0.11 0.16 Mesa Verde 2.18 1.89 0.99 0.29 0.90 1.19 Pecos 0.59 0.41 0.23 0.18 0.18 0.36 Petrified Forest 0.44 0.29 0.15 0.15 0.14 0.29 San Pedro 1.04 0.80 0.38 0.24 0.42 0.66 West Elk 0.43 0.33 0.13 0.10 0.20 0.30 Weminuche 0.81 0.63 0.26 0.18 0.37 0.55 Wheeler Peak 0.41 0.30 0.16 0.11 0.14 0.25 Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data. 2. NI = No Improvement 3. NA = Not Applicable 4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000): 

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree (w/o inj.) $13,783 Consent Decree to SCR (w/ inj.) $28,760 Pre-Consent Decree to SCR (w/ inj.) $42,543 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 64 of 148 

SCR/SNCR Hybrid with Inherent SO3 Removal and 

Sorbent Injection 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 65 of 148 

Table 61 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Facility 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.92 1.76 1.82 1.83 1.92 

Bandelier 1.31 1.86 1.51 1.56 1.86 

Black Canyon 1.14 1.34 1.40 1.29 1.40 

Canyonlands 2.59 2.04 2.00 2.21 2.59 

Capitol Reef 1.97 1.16 1.34 1.49 1.97 

Grand Canyon 1.14 0.93 0.81 0.96 1.14 

Great Sand Dunes 0.85 1.00 0.82 0.89 1.00 

La Garita 1.15 1.30 1.14 1.20 1.30 

Maroon Bells 0.67 0.78 0.63 0.70 0.78 

Mesa Verde 4.20 4.09 4.85 4.38 4.85 

Pecos 1.40 1.33 1.26 1.33 1.40 

Petrified Forest 1.13 0.79 0.74 0.88 1.13 

San Pedro 1.78 2.37 1.96 2.04 2.37 

West Elk 0.99 1.15 0.94 1.03 1.15 

Weminuche 1.51 1.85 1.69 1.69 1.85 

Wheeler Peak 1.00 0.95 1.05 1.00 1.05 

Overall 1.53 4.85 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 66 of 148 

Table 62 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Facility 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.69 1.65 1.49 1.61 1.69 

Bandelier 1.04 1.56 1.20 1.27 1.56 

Black Canyon 0.95 1.15 1.07 1.05 1.15 

Canyonlands 2.26 1.73 1.68 1.89 2.26 

Capitol Reef 1.81 0.82 1.05 1.23 1.81 

Grand Canyon 0.97 0.76 0.57 0.77 0.97 

Great Sand Dunes 0.63 0.71 0.64 0.66 0.71 

La Garita 0.86 0.94 0.90 0.90 0.94 

Maroon Bells 0.54 0.56 0.51 0.54 0.56 

Mesa Verde 3.38 3.53 3.80 3.57 3.80 

Pecos 1.05 1.09 1.00 1.05 1.09 

Petrified Forest 0.82 0.60 0.53 0.65 0.82 

San Pedro 1.40 2.01 1.56 1.66 2.01 

West Elk 0.80 0.91 0.83 0.85 0.91 

Weminuche 1.15 1.48 1.34 1.33 1.48 

Wheeler Peak 0.75 0.86 0.89 0.83 0.89 

Overall 1.24 3.80 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 67 of 148 

Table 63 

SCR/SNCR Hybrid with Inherent SO3 Removal and Sorbent Injection Visibility Modeling Results - Facility 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.41 1.25 1.11 1.26 1.41 

Bandelier 0.80 1.11 0.94 0.95 1.11 

Black Canyon 0.73 0.80 0.87 0.80 0.87 

Canyonlands 1.95 1.38 1.39 1.57 1.95 

Capitol Reef 1.43 0.58 0.83 0.95 1.43 

Grand Canyon 0.72 0.56 0.50 0.59 0.72 

Great Sand Dunes 0.49 0.55 0.43 0.49 0.55 

La Garita 0.60 0.63 0.63 0.62 0.63 

Maroon Bells 0.41 0.38 0.35 0.38 0.41 

Mesa Verde 2.41 2.65 2.83 2.63 2.83 

Pecos 0.73 0.78 0.82 0.78 0.82 

Petrified Forest 0.65 0.44 0.44 0.51 0.65 

San Pedro 1.16 1.47 1.28 1.30 1.47 

West Elk 0.61 0.60 0.56 0.59 0.61 

Weminuche 0.82 1.13 0.94 0.96 1.13 

Wheeler Peak 0.57 0.63 0.63 0.61 0.63 

Overall 0.94 2.83 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 68 of 148 

Table 64 

Facility Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visi

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) 

(98th Percentile, see Note 1) Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for each Class 1 A

Class 1 Area Pre-Consent Decree Consent Decree 

SCR/SNCR Hybrid with 

Inherent SO3 Removal and 

Sorbent Injection 

Pre-Consent Decree 

to Consent Decree 

Consent Decree to 

Hybrid 

Pre-Consent Dec

to Hybrid 

Arches 1.92 1.69 1.41 0.23 0.28 0.51 Bandelier 1.86 1.56 1.11 0.31 0.45 0.76 Black Canyon 1.40 1.15 0.87 0.26 0.28 0.53 Canyonlands 2.59 2.26 1.95 0.33 0.31 0.64 Capitol Reef 1.97 1.81 1.43 0.16 0.38 0.54 Grand Canyon 1.14 0.97 0.72 0.17 0.25 0.42 Great Sand Dunes 1.00 0.71 0.55 0.29 0.16 0.45 La Garita 1.30 0.94 0.63 0.36 0.32 0.68 Maroon Bells 0.78 0.56 0.41 0.22 0.15 0.37 Mesa Verde 4.85 3.80 2.83 1.06 0.96 2.02 Pecos 1.40 1.09 0.82 0.31 0.28 0.58 Petrified Forest 1.13 0.82 0.65 0.31 0.17 0.48 San Pedro 2.37 2.01 1.47 0.36 0.55 0.91 West Elk 1.15 0.91 0.61 0.24 0.31 0.55 Weminuche 1.85 1.48 1.13 0.37 0.36 0.73 Wheeler Peak 1.05 0.89 0.63 0.16 0.27 0.43 Notes: 

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data. 2. NI = No Improvement 3. NA = Not Applicable 4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000): 

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree (w/o inj.) $51,468 Consent Decree to Hybrid (w/ inj.) $90,614 Pre-Consent Decree to Hybrid (w/ inj.) $95,910 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 69 of 148 

Table 65 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 1 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.82 0.68 0.60 0.70 0.82 

Bandelier 0.31 0.49 0.54 0.45 0.54 

Black Canyon 0.35 0.37 0.38 0.37 0.38 

Canyonlands 1.10 0.84 0.71 0.88 1.10 

Capitol Reef 0.76 0.23 0.32 0.44 0.76 

Grand Canyon 0.31 0.21 0.16 0.23 0.31 

Great Sand Dunes 0.18 0.20 0.17 0.18 0.20 

La Garita 0.26 0.28 0.29 0.28 0.29 

Maroon Bells 0.18 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.18 

Mesa Verde 1.51 1.79 1.67 1.66 1.79 

Pecos 0.29 0.31 0.35 0.32 0.35 

Petrified Forest 0.25 0.16 0.14 0.18 0.25 

San Pedro 0.61 0.73 0.63 0.66 0.73 

West Elk 0.27 0.28 0.25 0.27 0.28 

Weminuche 0.37 0.54 0.45 0.45 0.54 

Wheeler Peak 0.24 0.25 0.26 0.25 0.26 

Overall 0.47 1.79 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 70 of 148 

Table 66 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 1 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.69 0.54 0.52 0.58 0.69 

Bandelier 0.24 0.40 0.37 0.34 0.40 

Black Canyon 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.29 0.29 

Canyonlands 1.00 0.65 0.57 0.74 1.00 

Capitol Reef 0.57 0.18 0.23 0.33 0.57 

Grand Canyon 0.27 0.16 0.12 0.18 0.27 

Great Sand Dunes 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 

La Garita 0.19 0.21 0.21 0.20 0.21 

Maroon Bells 0.14 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.14 

Mesa Verde 1.35 1.40 1.27 1.34 1.40 

Pecos 0.23 0.24 0.27 0.25 0.27 

Petrified Forest 0.19 0.13 0.11 0.14 0.19 

San Pedro 0.44 0.59 0.50 0.51 0.59 

West Elk 0.22 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.22 

Weminuche 0.31 0.43 0.35 0.36 0.43 

Wheeler Peak 0.19 0.17 0.20 0.19 0.20 

Overall 0.37 1.40 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 71 of 148 

Table 67 

SCR/SNCR Hybrid with Inherent SO3 Removal and Sorbent Injection Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 1 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.44 0.34 0.38 0.39 0.44 

Bandelier 0.16 0.26 0.23 0.21 0.26 

Black Canyon 0.18 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.18 

Canyonlands 0.71 0.40 0.40 0.51 0.71 

Capitol Reef 0.36 0.12 0.20 0.22 0.36 

Grand Canyon 0.17 0.12 0.10 0.13 0.17 

Great Sand Dunes 0.10 0.11 0.09 0.10 0.11 

La Garita 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.14 

Maroon Bells 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.08 0.08 

Mesa Verde 0.95 0.99 0.87 0.93 0.99 

Pecos 0.15 0.17 0.19 0.17 0.19 

Petrified Forest 0.14 0.09 0.09 0.11 0.14 

San Pedro 0.28 0.38 0.33 0.33 0.38 

West Elk 0.14 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.14 

Weminuche 0.19 0.29 0.22 0.23 0.29 

Wheeler Peak 0.13 0.11 0.15 0.13 0.15 

Overall 0.25 0.99 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 72 of 148 

Table 68 

Unit 1 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Vis

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) 

(98th Percentile, see Note 1) Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for each Class 1 A

Class 1 Area Pre-Consent Decree Consent Decree 

SCR/SNCR Hybrid with 

Inherent SO3 Removal and 

Sorbent Injection 

Pre-Consent Decree 

to Consent Decree 

Consent Decree to 

Hybrid 

Pre-Consent D

to Hybrid 

Arches 0.82 0.69 0.44 0.13 0.25 0.38 Bandelier 0.54 0.40 0.26 0.14 0.14 0.28 Black Canyon 0.38 0.29 0.18 0.09 0.11 0.20 Canyonlands 1.10 1.00 0.71 0.10 0.29 0.39 Capitol Reef 0.76 0.57 0.36 0.19 0.21 0.40 Grand Canyon 0.31 0.27 0.17 0.04 0.10 0.14 Great Sand Dunes 0.20 0.14 0.11 0.06 0.03 0.09 La Garita 0.29 0.21 0.14 0.08 0.07 0.15 Maroon Bells 0.18 0.14 0.08 0.04 0.06 0.10 Mesa Verde 1.79 1.40 0.99 0.39 0.41 0.80 Pecos 0.35 0.27 0.19 0.08 0.08 0.16 Petrified Forest 0.25 0.19 0.14 0.06 0.05 0.11 San Pedro 0.73 0.59 0.38 0.14 0.21 0.35 West Elk 0.28 0.22 0.14 0.06 0.08 0.14 Weminuche 0.54 0.43 0.29 0.11 0.15 0.26 Wheeler Peak 0.26 0.20 0.15 0.06 0.06 0.12 Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data. 2. NI = No Improvement 3. NA = Not Applicable 4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000): 

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree (w/o inj.) $11,849 Consent Decree to Hybrid (w/ inj.) $17,680 Pre-Consent Decree to Hybrid (w/ inj.) $19,102 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 73 of 148 

Table 69 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 2 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.83 0.64 0.58 0.68 0.83 

Bandelier 0.32 0.50 0.54 0.45 0.54 

Black Canyon 0.36 0.37 0.39 0.37 0.39 

Canyonlands 1.07 0.83 0.72 0.87 1.07 

Capitol Reef 0.78 0.23 0.31 0.44 0.78 

Grand Canyon 0.31 0.20 0.16 0.22 0.31 

Great Sand Dunes 0.19 0.21 0.17 0.19 0.21 

La Garita 0.26 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.29 

Maroon Bells 0.18 0.16 0.16 0.17 0.18 

Mesa Verde 1.49 1.82 1.66 1.66 1.82 

Pecos 0.29 0.31 0.36 0.32 0.36 

Petrified Forest 0.25 0.16 0.14 0.18 0.25 

San Pedro 0.63 0.73 0.64 0.67 0.73 

West Elk 0.27 0.29 0.26 0.27 0.29 

Weminuche 0.38 0.56 0.44 0.46 0.56 

Wheeler Peak 0.24 0.26 0.26 0.25 0.26 

Overall 0.47 1.82 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 74 of 148 

Table 70 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 2 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.69 0.54 0.52 0.58 0.69 

Bandelier 0.23 0.40 0.37 0.33 0.40 

Black Canyon 0.28 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.29 

Canyonlands 0.99 0.65 0.57 0.74 0.99 

Capitol Reef 0.57 0.18 0.23 0.33 0.57 

Grand Canyon 0.27 0.16 0.12 0.18 0.27 

Great Sand Dunes 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 

La Garita 0.19 0.21 0.21 0.20 0.21 

Maroon Bells 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.14 

Mesa Verde 1.35 1.40 1.26 1.34 1.40 

Pecos 0.23 0.24 0.27 0.25 0.27 

Petrified Forest 0.19 0.13 0.11 0.14 0.19 

San Pedro 0.44 0.58 0.50 0.51 0.58 

West Elk 0.22 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.22 

Weminuche 0.31 0.42 0.35 0.36 0.42 

Wheeler Peak 0.18 0.17 0.20 0.18 0.20 

Overall 0.37 1.40 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 75 of 148 

Table 71 

SCR/SNCR Hybrid with Inherent SO3 Removal and Sorbent Injection Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 2 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.44 0.34 0.37 0.38 0.44 

Bandelier 0.16 0.26 0.22 0.21 0.26 

Black Canyon 0.18 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.18 

Canyonlands 0.71 0.40 0.40 0.50 0.71 

Capitol Reef 0.36 0.12 0.19 0.22 0.36 

Grand Canyon 0.17 0.11 0.10 0.13 0.17 

Great Sand Dunes 0.10 0.11 0.09 0.10 0.11 

La Garita 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.14 

Maroon Bells 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.08 0.08 

Mesa Verde 0.94 0.99 0.86 0.93 0.99 

Pecos 0.15 0.17 0.19 0.17 0.19 

Petrified Forest 0.14 0.09 0.09 0.11 0.14 

San Pedro 0.27 0.38 0.33 0.33 0.38 

West Elk 0.14 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.14 

Weminuche 0.19 0.28 0.21 0.23 0.28 

Wheeler Peak 0.13 0.11 0.14 0.13 0.14 

Overall 0.25 0.99 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 76 of 148 

Table 72 

Unit 2 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visib

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) 

(98th Percentile, see Note 1) Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for each Class 1 A

Class 1 Area Pre-Consent Decree Consent Decree 

SCR/SNCR Hybrid with 

Inherent SO3 Removal and 

Sorbent Injection 

Pre-Consent Decree 

to Consent Decree 

Consent Decree to 

Hybrid 

Pre-Consent Dec

to Hybrid 

Arches 0.83 0.69 0.44 0.14 0.25 0.39 Bandelier 0.54 0.40 0.26 0.14 0.14 0.28 Black Canyon 0.39 0.29 0.18 0.10 0.11 0.21 Canyonlands 1.07 0.99 0.71 0.08 0.28 0.36 Capitol Reef 0.78 0.57 0.36 0.21 0.21 0.42 Grand Canyon 0.31 0.27 0.17 0.04 0.10 0.14 Great Sand Dunes 0.21 0.14 0.11 0.07 0.03 0.10 La Garita 0.29 0.21 0.14 0.08 0.07 0.15 Maroon Bells 0.18 0.14 0.08 0.04 0.06 0.10 Mesa Verde 1.82 1.40 0.99 0.42 0.41 0.83 Pecos 0.36 0.27 0.19 0.09 0.08 0.17 Petrified Forest 0.25 0.19 0.14 0.06 0.05 0.11 San Pedro 0.73 0.58 0.38 0.15 0.20 0.35 West Elk 0.29 0.22 0.14 0.07 0.08 0.15 Weminuche 0.56 0.42 0.28 0.14 0.14 0.28 Wheeler Peak 0.26 0.20 0.14 0.06 0.06 0.12 Notes: 

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data. 2. NI = No Improvement 3. NA = Not Applicable 4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000): 

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree (w/o inj.) $12,142 Consent Decree to Hybrid (w/ inj.) $18,143 Pre-Consent Decree to Hybrid (w/ inj.) $19,521 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 77 of 148 

Table 73 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 3 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.04 0.81 0.72 0.86 1.04 

Bandelier 0.53 0.81 0.71 0.68 0.81 

Black Canyon 0.58 0.53 0.59 0.57 0.59 

Canyonlands 1.44 1.04 0.96 1.15 1.44 

Capitol Reef 1.10 0.38 0.52 0.67 1.10 

Grand Canyon 0.48 0.33 0.26 0.36 0.48 

Great Sand Dunes 0.28 0.33 0.27 0.29 0.33 

La Garita 0.40 0.44 0.43 0.42 0.44 

Maroon Bells 0.24 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 

Mesa Verde 1.92 2.18 2.14 2.08 2.18 

Pecos 0.48 0.52 0.58 0.53 0.58 

Petrified Forest 0.43 0.25 0.24 0.31 0.43 

San Pedro 0.88 1.03 0.88 0.93 1.03 

West Elk 0.38 0.42 0.38 0.39 0.42 

Weminuche 0.59 0.82 0.65 0.69 0.82 

Wheeler Peak 0.37 0.39 0.37 0.38 0.39 

Overall 0.66 2.18 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 78 of 148 

Table 74 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 3 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.89 0.65 0.66 0.73 0.89 

Bandelier 0.39 0.57 0.61 0.52 0.61 

Black Canyon 0.44 0.41 0.46 0.44 0.46 

Canyonlands 1.15 0.85 0.79 0.93 1.15 

Capitol Reef 0.86 0.26 0.36 0.49 0.86 

Grand Canyon 0.35 0.24 0.19 0.26 0.35 

Great Sand Dunes 0.21 0.24 0.21 0.22 0.24 

La Garita 0.29 0.33 0.33 0.32 0.33 

Maroon Bells 0.20 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.20 

Mesa Verde 1.56 1.90 1.74 1.73 1.90 

Pecos 0.35 0.36 0.42 0.38 0.42 

Petrified Forest 0.29 0.18 0.17 0.21 0.29 

San Pedro 0.70 0.81 0.72 0.74 0.81 

West Elk 0.30 0.33 0.35 0.33 0.35 

Weminuche 0.44 0.64 0.50 0.53 0.64 

Wheeler Peak 0.28 0.31 0.28 0.29 0.31 

Overall 0.52 1.90 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 79 of 148 

Table 75 

SCR/SNCR Hybrid with Inherent SO3 Removal and Sorbent Injection Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 3 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.67 0.42 0.41 0.50 0.67 

Bandelier 0.26 0.39 0.38 0.34 0.39 

Black Canyon 0.28 0.26 0.30 0.28 0.30 

Canyonlands 0.85 0.56 0.56 0.66 0.85 

Capitol Reef 0.56 0.19 0.27 0.34 0.56 

Grand Canyon 0.23 0.18 0.16 0.19 0.23 

Great Sand Dunes 0.15 0.18 0.14 0.16 0.18 

La Garita 0.21 0.21 0.22 0.21 0.22 

Maroon Bells 0.13 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.13 

Mesa Verde 1.13 1.31 1.19 1.21 1.31 

Pecos 0.24 0.24 0.29 0.26 0.29 

Petrified Forest 0.22 0.14 0.14 0.17 0.22 

San Pedro 0.46 0.56 0.47 0.50 0.56 

West Elk 0.20 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 

Weminuche 0.29 0.41 0.30 0.33 0.41 

Wheeler Peak 0.19 0.22 0.19 0.20 0.22 

Overall 0.35 1.31 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 80 of 148 

Table 76 

Unit 3 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visib

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) 

(98th Percentile, see Note 1) Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for each Class 1 A

Class 1 Area Pre-Consent Decree Consent Decree 

SCR/SNCR Hybrid with 

Inherent SO3 Removal and 

Sorbent Injection 

Pre-Consent Decree 

to Consent Decree 

Consent Decree to 

Hybrid 

Pre-Consent Dec

to Hybrid 

Arches 1.04 0.89 0.67 0.15 0.23 0.38 Bandelier 0.81 0.61 0.39 0.20 0.22 0.42 Black Canyon 0.59 0.46 0.30 0.13 0.16 0.29 Canyonlands 1.44 1.15 0.85 0.29 0.30 0.59 Capitol Reef 1.10 0.86 0.56 0.24 0.30 0.54 Grand Canyon 0.48 0.35 0.23 0.13 0.13 0.26 Great Sand Dunes 0.33 0.24 0.18 0.09 0.06 0.15 La Garita 0.44 0.33 0.22 0.11 0.11 0.22 Maroon Bells 0.25 0.20 0.13 0.05 0.07 0.12 Mesa Verde 2.18 1.90 1.31 0.28 0.59 0.87 Pecos 0.58 0.42 0.29 0.16 0.13 0.29 Petrified Forest 0.43 0.29 0.22 0.14 0.07 0.21 San Pedro 1.03 0.81 0.56 0.22 0.25 0.47 West Elk 0.42 0.35 0.21 0.07 0.14 0.21 Weminuche 0.82 0.64 0.41 0.18 0.23 0.41 Wheeler Peak 0.39 0.31 0.22 0.08 0.09 0.17 Notes: 

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data. 2. NI = No Improvement 3. NA = Not Applicable 4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000): 

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree (w/o inj.) $13,694 Consent Decree to Hybrid (w/ inj.) $27,774 Pre-Consent Decree to Hybrid (w/ inj.) $29,014 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 81 of 148 

Table 77 

Pre-Consent Decree Modeling Results - Unit 4 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 1.05 0.84 0.74 0.88 1.05 

Bandelier 0.54 0.81 0.71 0.69 0.81 

Black Canyon 0.58 0.54 0.59 0.57 0.59 

Canyonlands 1.47 1.06 0.97 1.17 1.47 

Capitol Reef 1.11 0.38 0.53 0.67 1.11 

Grand Canyon 0.48 0.34 0.27 0.36 0.48 

Great Sand Dunes 0.29 0.34 0.27 0.30 0.34 

La Garita 0.40 0.45 0.43 0.43 0.45 

Maroon Bells 0.24 0.25 0.24 0.24 0.25 

Mesa Verde 1.94 2.18 2.15 2.09 2.18 

Pecos 0.48 0.52 0.59 0.53 0.59 

Petrified Forest 0.44 0.27 0.25 0.32 0.44 

San Pedro 0.89 1.04 0.88 0.94 1.04 

West Elk 0.38 0.43 0.39 0.40 0.43 

Weminuche 0.59 0.81 0.65 0.68 0.81 

Wheeler Peak 0.37 0.41 0.38 0.39 0.41 

Overall 0.67 2.18 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 82 of 148 

Table 78 

Baseline (Consent Decree) Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 4 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.88 0.65 0.63 0.72 0.88 

Bandelier 0.38 0.56 0.60 0.51 0.60 

Black Canyon 0.42 0.42 0.44 0.43 0.44 

Canyonlands 1.14 0.85 0.78 0.92 1.14 

Capitol Reef 0.86 0.26 0.35 0.49 0.86 

Grand Canyon 0.36 0.24 0.18 0.26 0.36 

Great Sand Dunes 0.21 0.23 0.21 0.22 0.23 

La Garita 0.28 0.32 0.32 0.31 0.32 

Maroon Bells 0.20 0.19 0.18 0.19 0.20 

Mesa Verde 1.55 1.89 1.73 1.72 1.89 

Pecos 0.34 0.35 0.41 0.37 0.41 

Petrified Forest 0.29 0.18 0.17 0.21 0.29 

San Pedro 0.69 0.80 0.69 0.73 0.80 

West Elk 0.30 0.33 0.33 0.32 0.33 

Weminuche 0.43 0.63 0.49 0.52 0.63 

Wheeler Peak 0.28 0.30 0.28 0.29 0.30 

Overall 0.51 1.89 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 83 of 148 

Table 79 

SCR/SNCR Hybrid with Inherent SO3 Removal and Sorbent Injection Visibility Modeling Results - Unit 4 

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv) 

Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum 

Arches 0.65 0.41 0.39 0.48 0.65 

Bandelier 0.26 0.39 0.37 0.34 0.39 

Black Canyon 0.27 0.26 0.29 0.28 0.29 

Canyonlands 0.87 0.57 0.56 0.66 0.87 

Capitol Reef 0.56 0.18 0.26 0.34 0.56 

Grand Canyon 0.22 0.17 0.15 0.18 0.22 

Great Sand Dunes 0.15 0.17 0.13 0.15 0.17 

La Garita 0.21 0.20 0.21 0.21 0.21 

Maroon Bells 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.12 

Mesa Verde 1.15 1.29 1.19 1.21 1.29 

Pecos 0.24 0.24 0.29 0.25 0.29 

Petrified Forest 0.22 0.14 0.14 0.16 0.22 

San Pedro 0.46 0.55 0.46 0.49 0.55 

West Elk 0.19 0.20 0.21 0.20 0.21 

Weminuche 0.29 0.40 0.30 0.33 0.40 

Wheeler Peak 0.18 0.21 0.19 0.19 0.21 

Overall 0.35 1.29 

 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 84 of 148 

Table 80 

Unit 4 Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visib

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning 

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv) Visibility Improvements (dv) 

(98th Percentile, see Note 1) Calculated from Maximum Visibility Results (for each Class 1 A

Class 1 Area Pre-Consent Decree Consent Decree 

SCR/SNCR Hybrid with 

Inherent SO3 Removal and 

Sorbent Injection 

Pre-Consent Decree 

to Consent Decree 

Consent Decree to 

Hybrid 

Pre-Consent Dec

to Hybrid 

Arches 1.05 0.88 0.65 0.17 0.23 0.40 Bandelier 0.81 0.60 0.39 0.21 0.21 0.42 Black Canyon 0.59 0.44 0.29 0.15 0.15 0.30 Canyonlands 1.47 1.14 0.87 0.33 0.27 0.60 Capitol Reef 1.11 0.86 0.56 0.25 0.30 0.55 Grand Canyon 0.48 0.36 0.22 0.12 0.14 0.26 Great Sand Dunes 0.34 0.23 0.17 0.11 0.06 0.17 La Garita 0.45 0.32 0.21 0.13 0.11 0.24 Maroon Bells 0.25 0.20 0.12 0.05 0.08 0.13 Mesa Verde 2.18 1.89 1.29 0.29 0.60 0.89 Pecos 0.59 0.41 0.29 0.18 0.12 0.30 Petrified Forest 0.44 0.29 0.22 0.15 0.07 0.22 San Pedro 1.04 0.80 0.55 0.24 0.25 0.49 West Elk 0.43 0.33 0.21 0.10 0.12 0.22 Weminuche 0.81 0.63 0.40 0.18 0.23 0.41 Wheeler Peak 0.41 0.30 0.21 0.11 0.09 0.20 Notes: 

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data. 2. NI = No Improvement 3. NA = Not Applicable 4. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000): 

Pre-Consent Decree to Consent Decree (w/o inj.) $13,783 Consent Decree to Hybrid (w/ inj.) $27,017 Pre-Consent Decree to Hybrid (w/ inj.) $28,273 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 85 of 148 

SCR with Inherent SO3 Removal 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 86 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 59 1.92 71.14 23.07 1.46 0.89 1.08 2.36 100

BAND 70 1.31 35.48 59.51 1.32 0.81 0.83 2.06 100

BLCA 40 1.14 52.26 45.03 0.71 0.44 0.43 1.13 100

CANY 80 2.59 65.05 28.99 1.51 0.92 1.08 2.44 100

CARE 31 1.97 51.54 43.71 1.15 0.71 1.06 1.83 100

GRCA 14 1.14 42.20 54.25 0.90 0.55 0.65 1.45 100

GRSA 23 0.85 77.31 14.03 2.38 1.46 1.09 3.75 100

LAGA 35 1.15 42.48 54.54 0.77 0.47 0.50 1.24 100

MABE 16 0.67 41.50 54.30 1.08 0.66 0.76 1.70 100

MEVE 184 4.20 84.29 1.94 3.21 1.97 3.57 5.03 100

PECO 53 1.40 43.19 52.60 1.08 0.66 0.76 1.71 100

PEFO 18 1.13 84.94 9.80 1.30 0.79 1.11 2.06 100

SAPE 111 1.78 79.88 8.73 2.70 1.65 2.83 4.20 100

WEEL 34 0.99 40.76 54.57 1.20 0.73 0.85 1.89 100

WEMI 74 1.51 26.70 66.76 1.53 0.94 1.66 2.40 100

WHPE 37 1.00 32.06 63.10 1.28 0.78 0.76 2.02 100

Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 47 1.69 33.57 62.13 1.88 0.48 0.48 1.46 100

BAND 49 1.04 30.40 66.83 1.26 0.32 0.23 0.97 100

BLCA 26 0.95 37.13 57.66 2.28 0.58 0.58 1.76 100

CANY 67 2.26 55.66 38.57 2.53 0.65 0.62 1.98 100

CARE 28 1.81 52.95 42.68 1.91 0.49 0.48 1.49 100

GRCA 12 0.97 38.14 59.75 0.93 0.24 0.19 0.75 100

GRSA 14 0.63 38.82 54.18 3.18 0.81 0.53 2.47 100

LAGA 20 0.86 38.38 59.80 0.81 0.21 0.15 0.65 100

MABE 10 0.54 69.46 25.41 2.29 0.59 0.43 1.83 100

MEVE 157 3.38 75.39 9.84 6.26 1.60 2.09 4.82 100

PECO 35 1.05 80.51 15.41 1.83 0.47 0.36 1.43 100

PEFO 14 0.82 27.95 69.41 1.18 0.30 0.25 0.92 100

SAPE 93 1.40 39.89 53.93 2.71 0.69 0.68 2.09 100

WEEL 19 0.80 37.76 60.62 0.70 0.18 0.19 0.55 100

WEMI 53 1.15 28.74 65.59 2.44 0.62 0.72 1.88 100

WHPE 27 0.75 30.82 66.18 1.36 0.35 0.23 1.06 100

SCR with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 44 1.34 87.25 8.71 1.78 0.46 0.38 1.43 100

BAND 35 0.71 80.24 14.79 2.21 0.57 0.47 1.72 100

BLCA 13 0.67 67.24 25.30 3.27 0.83 0.84 2.52 100

CANY 62 1.97 91.64 3.63 2.08 0.53 0.47 1.65 100

CARE 24 1.27 63.27 34.81 0.85 0.22 0.16 0.70 100

GRCA 10 0.60 71.25 25.30 1.52 0.39 0.31 1.22 100

GRSA 7 0.49 91.64 3.83 1.99 0.51 0.49 1.55 100

LAGA 7 0.49 64.49 28.07 3.30 0.84 0.74 2.56 100

MABE 3 0.34 91.75 3.23 2.25 0.57 0.43 1.77 100

MEVE 148 4.00 89.25 3.00 3.34 0.85 0.97 2.59 100

PECO 20 0.69 78.05 11.62 4.58 1.17 1.04 3.54 100

PEFO 12 0.58 90.36 2.79 3.00 0.77 0.75 2.33 100

SAPE 70 1.34 88.33 5.22 2.79 0.71 0.81 2.15 100

WEEL 9 0.53 88.57 6.41 2.23 0.57 0.45 1.77 100

WEMI 32 0.80 77.42 13.95 3.77 0.96 1.01 2.90 100

WHPE 12 0.60 78.13 17.69 1.91 0.49 0.26 1.52 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 87 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 46 1.76 43.87 46.41 2.37 1.45 2.20 3.70 100

BAND 87 1.86 44.28 49.89 1.45 0.89 1.18 2.31 100

BLCA 54 1.34 35.37 59.23 1.36 0.83 1.04 2.17 100

CANY 67 2.04 83.50 1.79 3.67 2.25 3.05 5.74 100

CARE 24 1.16 33.88 63.47 0.67 0.41 0.49 1.09 100

GRCA 15 0.93 89.85 2.03 2.09 1.28 1.45 3.30 100

GRSA 28 1.00 82.39 12.99 1.20 0.73 0.78 1.90 100

LAGA 63 1.30 81.37 13.32 1.40 0.86 0.81 2.24 100

MABE 20 0.78 28.96 63.27 2.15 1.32 0.80 3.49 100

MEVE 184 4.09 34.40 60.73 1.18 0.72 1.11 1.87 100

PECO 62 1.33 53.02 40.33 1.81 1.11 0.89 2.85 100

PEFO 16 0.79 90.95 1.94 1.81 1.11 1.31 2.89 100

SAPE 125 2.37 71.74 23.38 1.23 0.75 0.94 1.96 100

WEEL 43 1.15 35.15 60.78 1.03 0.63 0.76 1.65 100

WEMI 117 1.85 57.89 29.83 2.89 1.77 3.13 4.49 100

WHPE 40 0.95 55.69 38.20 1.67 1.02 0.74 2.67 100

Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 32 1.65 49.70 47.38 1.28 0.33 0.30 1.01 100

BAND 61 1.56 37.39 59.91 1.19 0.30 0.27 0.93 100

BLCA 30 1.15 31.11 65.99 1.28 0.33 0.28 1.02 100

CANY 57 1.73 52.51 43.96 1.55 0.40 0.35 1.23 100

CARE 18 0.82 91.30 1.66 3.11 0.79 0.69 2.46 100

GRCA 10 0.76 44.30 54.26 0.64 0.16 0.12 0.52 100

GRSA 17 0.71 28.48 69.87 0.74 0.19 0.13 0.60 100

LAGA 40 0.94 26.32 71.29 1.07 0.27 0.22 0.84 100

MABE 11 0.56 84.39 12.71 1.31 0.33 0.23 1.03 100

MEVE 162 3.53 85.08 5.44 4.14 1.06 1.04 3.24 100

PECO 41 1.09 41.87 56.64 0.66 0.17 0.13 0.53 100

PEFO 9 0.60 28.65 69.64 0.76 0.19 0.13 0.62 100

SAPE 109 2.01 46.15 47.36 2.82 0.72 0.76 2.19 100

WEEL 24 0.91 30.66 67.44 0.86 0.22 0.14 0.68 100

WEMI 83 1.48 57.20 35.77 3.02 0.77 0.91 2.32 100

WHPE 20 0.86 47.51 47.27 2.35 0.60 0.43 1.84 100

SCR with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 27 1.22 68.23 25.02 2.95 0.75 0.76 2.28 100

BAND 45 1.07 88.82 1.10 4.55 1.16 0.81 3.57 100

BLCA 20 0.69 65.37 29.66 2.20 0.56 0.47 1.75 100

CANY 47 1.36 78.66 16.78 2.00 0.51 0.45 1.59 100

CARE 10 0.67 95.29 0.26 1.99 0.51 0.40 1.56 100

GRCA 9 0.54 75.44 21.36 1.41 0.36 0.27 1.15 100

GRSA 5 0.48 63.22 33.72 1.37 0.35 0.25 1.09 100

LAGA 11 0.56 62.68 31.49 2.52 0.64 0.72 1.95 100

MABE 2 0.36 65.50 30.30 1.88 0.48 0.37 1.47 100

MEVE 163 3.79 87.23 1.39 4.95 1.26 1.35 3.82 100

PECO 22 0.79 66.67 26.22 3.19 0.81 0.65 2.47 100

PEFO 6 0.47 95.46 0.68 1.73 0.44 0.31 1.38 100

SAPE 80 1.57 76.66 14.82 3.70 0.95 0.99 2.88 100

WEEL 10 0.57 63.24 32.22 2.01 0.51 0.45 1.57 100

WEMI 54 1.22 92.00 3.67 1.95 0.50 0.34 1.54 100

WHPE 12 0.55 70.33 26.52 1.41 0.36 0.26 1.12 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 88 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 39 1.82 38.16 50.64 2.67 1.63 2.75 4.15 100

BAND 77 1.51 40.84 49.83 2.33 1.43 1.94 3.63 100

BLCA 30 1.40 29.26 67.79 0.76 0.46 0.52 1.21 100

CANY 57 2.00 64.92 31.30 0.94 0.58 0.72 1.53 100

CARE 25 1.34 43.68 49.81 1.57 0.96 1.51 2.47 100

GRCA 11 0.81 91.83 0.94 1.83 1.12 1.34 2.94 100

GRSA 26 0.82 50.03 45.62 1.12 0.68 0.79 1.76 100

LAGA 40 1.14 25.27 67.60 2.02 1.24 0.66 3.22 100

MABE 15 0.63 36.60 57.88 1.53 0.94 0.65 2.41 100

MEVE 174 4.85 69.32 17.06 3.27 2.00 3.22 5.14 100

PECO 63 1.26 49.00 43.40 1.87 1.15 1.66 2.93 100

PEFO 17 0.74 88.02 6.36 1.46 0.90 0.89 2.36 100

SAPE 127 1.96 80.84 9.41 2.36 1.45 2.22 3.73 100

WEEL 31 0.94 25.57 71.56 0.70 0.43 0.61 1.12 100

WEMI 87 1.69 40.63 54.52 1.17 0.72 1.13 1.84 100

WHPE 48 1.05 48.42 48.68 0.78 0.48 0.39 1.25 100

Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 27 1.49 30.95 67.01 0.89 0.23 0.21 0.71 100

BAND 57 1.20 77.97 17.21 2.11 0.54 0.52 1.65 100

BLCA 21 1.07 27.98 70.17 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.65 100

CANY 48 1.68 70.45 24.81 2.07 0.53 0.49 1.65 100

CARE 23 1.05 52.60 45.24 0.94 0.24 0.20 0.77 100

GRCA 9 0.57 93.89 1.17 2.19 0.56 0.46 1.74 100

GRSA 15 0.64 27.42 70.94 0.76 0.19 0.09 0.60 100

LAGA 28 0.90 23.76 71.98 1.99 0.51 0.18 1.58 100

MABE 8 0.51 27.63 69.59 1.22 0.31 0.28 0.97 100

MEVE 159 3.80 41.19 53.18 2.41 0.62 0.72 1.88 100

PECO 50 1.00 51.25 46.75 0.89 0.23 0.18 0.70 100

PEFO 9 0.53 32.43 65.01 1.15 0.29 0.18 0.93 100

SAPE 97 1.56 37.04 56.49 2.78 0.71 0.83 2.15 100

WEEL 22 0.83 28.10 67.91 1.74 0.44 0.44 1.36 100

WEMI 63 1.34 36.23 61.45 1.00 0.26 0.29 0.77 100

WHPE 27 0.89 91.09 5.38 1.60 0.41 0.26 1.25 100

SCR with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 24 1.18 89.12 7.97 1.28 0.33 0.28 1.02 100

BAND 43 0.98 85.23 7.65 3.23 0.82 0.55 2.51 100

BLCA 11 0.77 72.96 23.66 1.49 0.38 0.33 1.18 100

CANY 40 1.49 89.19 4.26 2.81 0.72 0.86 2.17 100

CARE 17 0.86 68.68 26.03 2.30 0.59 0.63 1.78 100

GRCA 7 0.48 83.45 13.09 1.53 0.39 0.31 1.23 100

GRSA 6 0.40 80.79 14.99 1.88 0.48 0.39 1.47 100

LAGA 9 0.56 78.13 17.98 1.74 0.44 0.31 1.39 100

MABE 2 0.30 72.60 21.46 2.76 0.70 0.33 2.15 100

MEVE 154 4.27 84.80 6.04 3.95 1.01 1.15 3.04 100

PECO 31 0.84 86.93 9.62 1.56 0.40 0.26 1.23 100

PEFO 7 0.48 90.40 5.25 1.94 0.50 0.34 1.57 100

SAPE 84 1.46 78.87 14.05 3.10 0.79 0.79 2.41 100

WEEL 7 0.48 64.39 28.67 3.03 0.77 0.76 2.37 100

WEMI 43 0.94 75.39 11.29 5.69 1.45 1.66 4.51 100

WHPE 10 0.59 78.71 18.41 1.31 0.34 0.20 1.04 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 89 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 16 0.82 25.92 68.87 1.30 0.79 1.06 2.06 100

BAND 1 0.31 41.96 53.16 1.24 0.75 0.94 1.95 100

BLCA 2 0.35 31.77 66.43 0.47 0.29 0.29 0.75 100

CANY 28 1.10 43.62 52.48 0.91 0.55 1.03 1.41 100

CARE 12 0.76 26.38 71.01 0.64 0.38 0.58 1.01 100

GRCA 5 0.31 31.06 66.09 0.72 0.44 0.52 1.17 100

GRSA 0 0.18 87.77 6.73 1.38 0.83 1.12 2.17 100

LAGA 1 0.26 36.35 60.88 0.72 0.44 0.46 1.16 100

MABE 0 0.18 23.69 72.07 1.08 0.65 0.82 1.69 100

MEVE 55 1.51 47.09 35.97 3.88 2.35 4.67 6.04 100

PECO 2 0.29 24.39 68.71 1.72 1.04 1.48 2.67 100

PEFO 2 0.25 84.76 11.37 0.99 0.60 0.69 1.59 100

SAPE 10 0.61 26.56 68.07 1.32 0.80 1.20 2.05 100

WEEL 2 0.27 31.55 66.50 0.52 0.31 0.29 0.82 100

WEMI 3 0.37 22.71 69.34 1.89 1.14 1.99 2.93 100

WHPE 2 0.24 27.68 69.49 0.76 0.46 0.42 1.20 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.69 25.34 71.69 1.31 0.33 0.31 1.03 100

BAND 1 0.24 43.57 53.42 1.34 0.34 0.29 1.04 100

BLCA 2 0.29 23.45 74.26 0.99 0.25 0.26 0.78 100

CANY 22 1.00 38.19 59.52 1.01 0.26 0.23 0.80 100

CARE 11 0.57 26.93 71.52 0.67 0.17 0.17 0.53 100

GRCA 4 0.27 30.85 67.43 0.76 0.19 0.15 0.61 100

GRSA 0 0.14 21.45 76.75 0.80 0.20 0.17 0.63 100

LAGA 0 0.19 28.88 69.14 0.89 0.23 0.16 0.70 100

MABE 0 0.14 20.45 75.64 1.73 0.44 0.40 1.34 100

MEVE 38 1.35 35.69 59.62 2.00 0.51 0.63 1.55 100

PECO 1 0.23 25.62 70.23 1.82 0.47 0.44 1.41 100

PEFO 2 0.19 25.42 72.19 1.06 0.27 0.23 0.84 100

SAPE 7 0.44 27.36 69.47 1.39 0.36 0.35 1.08 100

WEEL 0 0.22 33.65 63.73 1.17 0.30 0.22 0.93 100

WEMI 2 0.31 30.63 61.38 3.48 0.89 0.91 2.70 100

WHPE 2 0.19 28.38 69.83 0.81 0.21 0.13 0.64 100

SCR with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 4 0.37 61.96 32.33 2.51 0.64 0.59 1.97 100

BAND 0 0.15 61.60 33.19 2.29 0.58 0.55 1.78 100

BLCA 0 0.14 73.87 20.42 2.58 0.66 0.45 2.03 100

CANY 9 0.58 72.47 24.36 1.40 0.36 0.30 1.12 100

CARE 5 0.28 65.23 31.53 1.41 0.36 0.36 1.12 100

GRCA 1 0.14 68.57 28.09 1.47 0.38 0.30 1.19 100

GRSA 0 0.10 75.06 14.75 4.65 1.19 0.75 3.61 100

LAGA 0 0.11 73.77 23.11 1.39 0.36 0.26 1.11 100

MABE 0 0.07 62.19 32.36 2.42 0.62 0.52 1.88 100

MEVE 25 1.02 64.06 29.53 2.72 0.70 0.87 2.11 100

PECO 0 0.15 76.29 13.68 4.44 1.14 1.00 3.45 100

PEFO 1 0.11 90.31 2.92 2.96 0.76 0.74 2.31 100

SAPE 1 0.31 89.63 5.07 2.31 0.59 0.59 1.81 100

WEEL 0 0.11 88.38 6.63 2.21 0.57 0.45 1.76 100

WEMI 0 0.17 78.16 7.38 6.29 1.61 1.70 4.86 100

WHPE 0 0.13 86.05 8.45 2.45 0.63 0.51 1.91 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 90 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 11 0.68 24.06 72.39 0.91 0.55 0.63 1.46 100

BAND 7 0.49 50.26 40.84 2.33 1.41 1.50 3.66 100

BLCA 4 0.37 19.24 76.63 0.99 0.60 0.99 1.55 100

CANY 16 0.84 30.14 66.46 0.85 0.51 0.67 1.36 100

CARE 4 0.23 29.36 68.45 0.54 0.33 0.45 0.87 100

GRCA 1 0.21 42.87 54.86 0.58 0.35 0.37 0.97 100

GRSA 0 0.20 27.46 69.95 0.68 0.41 0.39 1.10 100

LAGA 0 0.28 23.68 72.69 0.93 0.56 0.66 1.48 100

MABE 0 0.16 27.20 65.28 2.09 1.27 0.76 3.40 100

MEVE 73 1.79 37.50 56.98 1.29 0.78 1.40 2.05 100

PECO 3 0.31 38.08 53.60 2.22 1.34 1.25 3.51 100

PEFO 2 0.16 28.11 69.15 0.71 0.43 0.44 1.17 100

SAPE 27 0.73 26.46 67.64 1.45 0.88 1.29 2.29 100

WEEL 1 0.28 23.98 70.42 1.36 0.82 1.31 2.11 100

WEMI 9 0.54 43.96 46.81 2.18 1.32 2.34 3.39 100

WHPE 0 0.25 30.07 67.71 0.57 0.35 0.39 0.92 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.54 23.97 72.89 1.37 0.35 0.35 1.07 100

BAND 4 0.40 31.04 66.80 0.95 0.24 0.22 0.75 100

BLCA 1 0.29 25.16 72.63 0.98 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

CANY 13 0.65 23.43 73.82 1.20 0.31 0.31 0.94 100

CARE 3 0.18 31.45 66.94 0.71 0.18 0.15 0.57 100

GRCA 1 0.16 43.73 54.87 0.62 0.16 0.11 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.14 27.52 70.87 0.72 0.19 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 0 0.21 25.77 71.45 1.20 0.31 0.33 0.94 100

MABE 0 0.12 26.89 71.16 0.87 0.22 0.16 0.69 100

MEVE 52 1.40 60.18 31.05 3.70 0.95 1.26 2.86 100

PECO 3 0.24 40.91 57.63 0.65 0.17 0.13 0.52 100

PEFO 0 0.13 28.41 69.90 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.62 100

SAPE 16 0.59 26.83 69.85 1.45 0.37 0.35 1.14 100

WEEL 0 0.20 24.64 72.13 1.40 0.36 0.38 1.09 100

WEMI 6 0.43 24.32 73.64 0.90 0.23 0.19 0.72 100

WHPE 0 0.17 31.55 67.09 0.60 0.15 0.12 0.49 100

SCR with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 3 0.29 91.93 0.23 3.45 0.88 0.81 2.69 100

BAND 2 0.23 65.79 26.29 3.49 0.89 0.83 2.71 100

BLCA 0 0.15 66.52 29.74 1.68 0.43 0.29 1.33 100

CANY 4 0.34 66.55 25.94 3.24 0.83 0.93 2.51 100

CARE 0 0.13 95.27 0.28 1.98 0.51 0.40 1.56 100

GRCA 0 0.11 75.19 21.66 1.39 0.36 0.26 1.14 100

GRSA 0 0.09 63.20 33.74 1.37 0.35 0.24 1.10 100

LAGA 0 0.11 69.83 27.24 1.30 0.33 0.26 1.04 100

MABE 0 0.07 67.60 24.10 3.83 0.98 0.40 3.10 100

MEVE 37 1.03 79.00 10.77 4.45 1.14 1.19 3.45 100

PECO 0 0.17 90.98 2.36 3.04 0.78 0.45 2.39 100

PEFO 0 0.10 95.44 0.70 1.72 0.44 0.31 1.38 100

SAPE 5 0.39 80.36 14.22 2.40 0.61 0.55 1.86 100

WEEL 0 0.11 67.27 22.92 4.26 1.09 1.16 3.30 100

WEMI 0 0.28 68.80 27.74 1.53 0.39 0.31 1.22 100

WHPE 0 0.11 69.61 27.31 1.38 0.35 0.25 1.10 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 91 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.60 28.75 65.62 1.35 0.81 1.33 2.14 100

BAND 8 0.54 22.07 72.47 1.34 0.81 1.23 2.09 100

BLCA 2 0.38 34.19 62.97 0.72 0.43 0.54 1.15 100

CANY 14 0.71 29.97 59.10 2.54 1.54 2.91 3.94 100

CARE 3 0.32 86.40 1.13 3.02 1.83 2.88 4.74 100

GRCA 0 0.16 51.56 42.85 1.42 0.86 1.00 2.30 100

GRSA 1 0.17 19.79 77.41 0.69 0.42 0.59 1.10 100

LAGA 2 0.29 36.29 60.25 0.89 0.54 0.59 1.44 100

MABE 0 0.16 31.87 65.36 0.70 0.42 0.53 1.12 100

MEVE 60 1.67 38.31 45.74 3.66 2.22 4.38 5.69 100

PECO 3 0.35 51.53 42.28 1.61 0.98 1.01 2.59 100

PEFO 0 0.14 31.20 64.81 1.05 0.64 0.58 1.73 100

SAPE 13 0.63 34.16 60.15 1.34 0.81 1.43 2.10 100

WEEL 0 0.25 23.83 70.37 1.42 0.86 1.27 2.25 100

WEMI 4 0.45 21.90 69.56 2.19 1.33 1.52 3.49 100

WHPE 1 0.26 22.07 72.11 1.47 0.89 1.11 2.34 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.52 29.53 67.07 1.47 0.38 0.40 1.16 100

BAND 3 0.37 23.82 72.96 1.41 0.36 0.36 1.10 100

BLCA 0 0.28 25.40 72.77 0.80 0.20 0.19 0.64 100

CANY 12 0.57 38.31 60.22 0.65 0.17 0.14 0.52 100

CARE 2 0.23 31.26 65.22 1.53 0.39 0.39 1.20 100

GRCA 0 0.12 52.37 44.18 1.52 0.39 0.31 1.22 100

GRSA 1 0.14 27.01 70.46 1.12 0.29 0.22 0.89 100

LAGA 0 0.21 20.74 75.52 1.71 0.44 0.17 1.41 100

MABE 0 0.11 33.14 63.55 1.53 0.39 0.19 1.20 100

MEVE 48 1.27 41.93 48.61 4.01 1.03 1.33 3.10 100

PECO 1 0.27 46.70 51.27 0.91 0.23 0.15 0.73 100

PEFO 0 0.11 31.59 65.92 1.12 0.29 0.18 0.91 100

SAPE 7 0.50 26.74 68.42 2.08 0.53 0.62 1.61 100

WEEL 0 0.20 20.88 76.49 1.15 0.30 0.29 0.90 100

WEMI 3 0.35 45.71 42.80 4.96 1.27 1.43 3.84 100

WHPE 0 0.20 22.74 73.74 1.56 0.40 0.34 1.23 100

SCR with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 3 0.34 74.64 22.63 1.20 0.31 0.27 0.95 100

BAND 0 0.20 83.18 9.90 3.14 0.80 0.54 2.45 100

BLCA 0 0.17 74.15 22.80 1.33 0.34 0.30 1.07 100

CANY 6 0.37 81.95 15.39 1.17 0.30 0.24 0.94 100

CARE 1 0.20 92.75 0.18 3.05 0.78 0.86 2.39 100

GRCA 0 0.10 82.80 13.76 1.52 0.39 0.31 1.23 100

GRSA 0 0.08 80.25 15.56 1.86 0.48 0.39 1.46 100

LAGA 0 0.12 72.40 23.24 1.91 0.49 0.48 1.49 100

MABE 0 0.06 62.28 33.08 2.04 0.52 0.43 1.64 100

MEVE 37 1.14 72.79 14.10 5.54 1.42 1.87 4.28 100

PECO 0 0.18 70.01 26.06 1.78 0.45 0.28 1.41 100

PEFO 0 0.10 90.27 5.40 1.93 0.49 0.34 1.57 100

SAPE 3 0.32 92.35 2.54 2.25 0.57 0.54 1.75 100

WEEL 0 0.11 63.07 30.13 2.97 0.76 0.74 2.33 100

WEMI 0 0.21 73.57 16.25 4.32 1.11 1.40 3.34 100

WHPE 0 0.13 84.11 10.37 2.52 0.65 0.34 2.00 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 92 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 16 0.83 25.00 69.90 1.28 0.78 1.04 2.02 100

BAND 1 0.32 25.12 71.09 1.01 0.61 0.61 1.57 100

BLCA 3 0.36 23.37 71.60 1.28 0.78 0.99 1.98 100

CANY 27 1.07 40.57 55.69 0.86 0.53 1.00 1.35 100

CARE 12 0.78 25.24 72.22 0.62 0.38 0.56 0.99 100

GRCA 5 0.31 29.84 67.36 0.71 0.43 0.51 1.15 100

GRSA 0 0.19 32.82 57.23 2.66 1.62 1.52 4.16 100

LAGA 0 0.26 34.98 62.29 0.71 0.43 0.46 1.14 100

MABE 0 0.18 19.11 76.53 1.10 0.67 0.86 1.73 100

MEVE 56 1.49 45.92 37.44 3.81 2.32 4.60 5.92 100

PECO 2 0.29 84.16 9.33 1.63 0.99 1.33 2.56 100

PEFO 2 0.25 23.63 72.55 0.97 0.59 0.72 1.54 100

SAPE 11 0.63 25.41 69.31 1.29 0.79 1.19 2.01 100

WEEL 1 0.27 30.10 67.99 0.51 0.31 0.29 0.80 100

WEMI 3 0.38 31.78 59.74 2.05 1.25 1.98 3.19 100

WHPE 2 0.24 26.23 70.99 0.74 0.45 0.42 1.17 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.69 25.31 71.71 1.31 0.34 0.31 1.02 100

BAND 1 0.23 43.57 53.42 1.34 0.34 0.29 1.03 100

BLCA 2 0.28 23.45 74.26 1.00 0.26 0.26 0.77 100

CANY 22 0.99 38.13 59.58 1.01 0.26 0.23 0.80 100

CARE 10 0.57 26.92 71.52 0.68 0.17 0.17 0.53 100

GRCA 4 0.27 30.84 67.43 0.76 0.20 0.15 0.61 100

GRSA 0 0.14 21.45 76.75 0.80 0.21 0.17 0.62 100

LAGA 0 0.19 28.87 69.14 0.89 0.23 0.16 0.70 100

MABE 0 0.14 20.45 75.64 1.74 0.44 0.40 1.33 100

MEVE 38 1.35 35.54 59.78 2.00 0.51 0.63 1.53 100

PECO 1 0.23 25.62 70.23 1.83 0.47 0.44 1.40 100

PEFO 2 0.19 25.42 72.18 1.07 0.27 0.23 0.83 100

SAPE 7 0.44 27.35 69.47 1.40 0.36 0.35 1.07 100

WEEL 0 0.22 33.65 63.72 1.18 0.30 0.22 0.92 100

WEMI 2 0.31 30.63 61.38 3.50 0.90 0.91 2.69 100

WHPE 2 0.18 28.38 69.83 0.82 0.21 0.13 0.64 100

SCR with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 4 0.36 61.95 32.34 2.52 0.65 0.59 1.96 100

BAND 0 0.15 61.60 33.19 2.30 0.59 0.55 1.77 100

BLCA 0 0.14 73.86 20.42 2.59 0.66 0.45 2.02 100

CANY 9 0.58 72.46 24.36 1.41 0.36 0.30 1.11 100

CARE 4 0.28 65.22 31.53 1.41 0.36 0.36 1.11 100

GRCA 1 0.14 68.56 28.09 1.48 0.38 0.30 1.19 100

GRSA 0 0.10 75.05 14.75 4.67 1.19 0.75 3.59 100

LAGA 0 0.11 73.77 23.11 1.40 0.36 0.26 1.11 100

MABE 0 0.07 62.19 32.36 2.43 0.62 0.52 1.87 100

MEVE 25 1.02 63.98 29.62 2.73 0.70 0.87 2.10 100

PECO 0 0.15 76.28 13.68 4.47 1.14 1.00 3.43 100

PEFO 1 0.11 90.31 2.92 2.98 0.76 0.74 2.30 100

SAPE 1 0.31 89.62 5.07 2.32 0.59 0.59 1.80 100

WEEL 0 0.11 60.89 34.34 2.09 0.53 0.53 1.62 100

WEMI 0 0.17 78.15 7.38 6.32 1.62 1.70 4.83 100

WHPE 0 0.13 90.12 3.93 2.72 0.70 0.44 2.10 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 93 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 11 0.64 26.15 67.85 1.45 0.89 1.39 2.27 100

BAND 7 0.50 48.55 42.63 2.30 1.40 1.49 3.62 100

BLCA 4 0.37 18.38 77.59 0.97 0.59 0.97 1.51 100

CANY 15 0.83 28.77 67.90 0.83 0.51 0.66 1.33 100

CARE 4 0.23 27.98 69.89 0.53 0.32 0.44 0.85 100

GRCA 1 0.20 40.86 56.90 0.57 0.35 0.37 0.95 100

GRSA 0 0.21 26.11 71.35 0.67 0.41 0.39 1.08 100

LAGA 0 0.29 22.65 73.82 0.90 0.55 0.64 1.44 100

MABE 0 0.16 26.26 66.39 2.05 1.25 0.74 3.32 100

MEVE 72 1.82 36.41 58.08 1.29 0.79 1.39 2.04 100

PECO 3 0.31 36.65 55.19 2.17 1.32 1.23 3.43 100

PEFO 2 0.16 26.72 70.61 0.69 0.42 0.43 1.13 100

SAPE 28 0.73 25.48 68.66 1.43 0.87 1.28 2.26 100

WEEL 1 0.29 22.95 71.57 1.32 0.81 1.29 2.06 100

WEMI 9 0.56 18.60 76.08 1.26 0.77 1.32 1.97 100

WHPE 0 0.26 28.49 69.36 0.55 0.33 0.38 0.89 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.54 23.96 72.89 1.38 0.35 0.35 1.07 100

BAND 4 0.40 31.03 66.81 0.95 0.24 0.22 0.74 100

BLCA 1 0.29 25.16 72.63 0.98 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

CANY 13 0.65 23.42 73.82 1.20 0.31 0.31 0.93 100

CARE 3 0.18 31.45 66.94 0.71 0.18 0.15 0.57 100

GRCA 1 0.16 43.73 54.87 0.62 0.16 0.11 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.14 27.52 70.87 0.73 0.19 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 0 0.21 25.77 71.45 1.21 0.31 0.33 0.93 100

MABE 0 0.11 26.89 71.16 0.88 0.22 0.16 0.69 100

MEVE 52 1.40 60.02 31.23 3.71 0.95 1.25 2.84 100

PECO 3 0.24 40.91 57.63 0.65 0.17 0.13 0.52 100

PEFO 0 0.13 28.41 69.90 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.61 100

SAPE 16 0.58 26.82 69.85 1.46 0.37 0.35 1.14 100

WEEL 0 0.20 24.64 72.13 1.41 0.36 0.38 1.08 100

WEMI 6 0.42 24.31 73.65 0.91 0.23 0.19 0.72 100

WHPE 0 0.17 31.55 67.09 0.61 0.16 0.12 0.48 100

SCR with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 3 0.28 91.92 0.23 3.47 0.89 0.81 2.68 100

BAND 2 0.23 65.78 26.29 3.51 0.90 0.83 2.70 100

BLCA 0 0.15 66.52 29.74 1.69 0.43 0.29 1.33 100

CANY 4 0.34 66.52 25.95 3.26 0.83 0.94 2.50 100

CARE 0 0.13 95.27 0.28 1.99 0.51 0.40 1.56 100

GRCA 0 0.11 75.19 21.66 1.40 0.36 0.26 1.14 100

GRSA 0 0.09 63.19 33.74 1.38 0.35 0.24 1.09 100

LAGA 0 0.11 69.82 27.25 1.31 0.33 0.26 1.04 100

MABE 0 0.07 67.59 24.09 3.85 0.99 0.40 3.08 100

MEVE 37 1.03 78.95 10.82 4.47 1.14 1.19 3.43 100

PECO 0 0.16 90.98 2.36 3.05 0.78 0.45 2.38 100

PEFO 0 0.10 95.44 0.70 1.73 0.44 0.31 1.38 100

SAPE 5 0.39 80.32 14.25 2.41 0.62 0.55 1.85 100

WEEL 0 0.11 67.26 22.92 4.28 1.09 1.16 3.28 100

WEMI 0 0.28 68.79 27.75 1.53 0.39 0.31 1.22 100

WHPE 0 0.11 69.61 27.31 1.39 0.35 0.25 1.09 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 94 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.58 26.09 65.91 1.91 1.16 1.95 2.97 100

BAND 8 0.54 21.18 73.48 1.31 0.80 1.19 2.04 100

BLCA 3 0.39 31.74 65.45 0.70 0.43 0.55 1.12 100

CANY 13 0.72 29.11 60.16 2.49 1.52 2.85 3.87 100

CARE 3 0.31 86.04 1.21 3.09 1.88 2.94 4.84 100

GRCA 0 0.16 49.96 44.45 1.42 0.86 1.00 2.29 100

GRSA 1 0.17 25.45 72.07 0.69 0.42 0.28 1.09 100

LAGA 1 0.29 19.38 74.87 1.61 0.98 0.49 2.66 100

MABE 0 0.16 31.67 65.36 0.73 0.45 0.63 1.16 100

MEVE 60 1.66 38.26 45.78 3.66 2.23 4.39 5.68 100

PECO 3 0.36 20.30 74.98 1.21 0.74 0.82 1.96 100

PEFO 0 0.14 69.40 24.51 1.58 0.96 0.97 2.58 100

SAPE 13 0.64 24.73 67.13 1.92 1.17 2.07 2.99 100

WEEL 0 0.26 22.86 71.46 1.39 0.85 1.25 2.20 100

WEMI 4 0.44 37.67 57.85 1.06 0.65 1.12 1.65 100

WHPE 1 0.26 32.19 65.39 0.61 0.37 0.45 0.98 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.52 29.52 67.08 1.47 0.38 0.40 1.15 100

BAND 3 0.37 23.81 72.96 1.42 0.36 0.36 1.09 100

BLCA 0 0.28 25.40 72.77 0.80 0.21 0.19 0.64 100

CANY 12 0.57 38.31 60.22 0.65 0.17 0.14 0.52 100

CARE 2 0.23 31.25 65.23 1.54 0.39 0.39 1.20 100

GRCA 0 0.12 52.36 44.18 1.53 0.39 0.31 1.22 100

GRSA 1 0.14 27.01 70.46 1.13 0.29 0.22 0.89 100

LAGA 0 0.21 20.74 75.52 1.72 0.44 0.17 1.40 100

MABE 0 0.11 33.14 63.55 1.54 0.39 0.19 1.19 100

MEVE 48 1.26 41.89 48.65 4.03 1.03 1.33 3.08 100

PECO 1 0.27 46.68 51.28 0.92 0.24 0.15 0.73 100

PEFO 0 0.11 72.61 23.59 1.70 0.44 0.30 1.37 100

SAPE 7 0.50 26.73 68.43 2.09 0.53 0.62 1.60 100

WEEL 0 0.20 20.87 76.49 1.16 0.30 0.29 0.89 100

WEMI 3 0.35 45.70 42.79 4.98 1.28 1.43 3.82 100

WHPE 0 0.20 22.74 73.73 1.56 0.40 0.34 1.22 100

SCR with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 3 0.34 74.63 22.64 1.20 0.31 0.27 0.95 100

BAND 0 0.20 83.17 9.90 3.15 0.81 0.54 2.44 100

BLCA 0 0.17 74.15 22.81 1.34 0.34 0.31 1.06 100

CANY 6 0.37 81.94 15.40 1.18 0.30 0.24 0.94 100

CARE 1 0.20 92.74 0.18 3.06 0.78 0.86 2.38 100

GRCA 0 0.10 82.79 13.76 1.52 0.39 0.31 1.22 100

GRSA 0 0.08 80.25 15.56 1.87 0.48 0.39 1.46 100

LAGA 0 0.12 72.39 23.24 1.92 0.49 0.48 1.48 100

MABE 0 0.06 62.27 33.08 2.05 0.52 0.43 1.63 100

MEVE 37 1.14 72.77 14.11 5.57 1.42 1.87 4.26 100

PECO 0 0.18 70.01 26.07 1.78 0.46 0.28 1.40 100

PEFO 0 0.10 90.26 5.40 1.94 0.50 0.34 1.56 100

SAPE 3 0.32 92.34 2.54 2.26 0.58 0.54 1.74 100

WEEL 0 0.11 63.06 30.13 2.98 0.76 0.74 2.32 100

WEMI 0 0.21 73.55 16.27 4.34 1.11 1.41 3.32 100

WHPE 0 0.13 84.11 10.37 2.54 0.65 0.34 1.99 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 95 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 1.04 37.90 59.89 0.56 0.35 0.41 0.89 100

BAND 9 0.53 76.32 16.85 1.73 1.07 1.30 2.73 100

BLCA 10 0.58 27.65 66.71 1.42 0.87 1.14 2.21 100

CANY 35 1.44 35.63 61.86 0.63 0.39 0.48 1.02 100

CARE 17 1.10 29.96 67.35 0.65 0.40 0.61 1.03 100

GRCA 7 0.48 30.18 67.22 0.65 0.40 0.53 1.03 100

GRSA 1 0.28 76.24 15.49 2.27 1.39 1.03 3.58 100

LAGA 4 0.40 39.72 57.57 0.70 0.43 0.45 1.13 100

MABE 1 0.24 35.97 61.92 0.56 0.35 0.32 0.89 100

MEVE 100 1.92 53.68 38.69 1.83 1.12 1.82 2.86 100

PECO 6 0.48 51.34 44.27 1.13 0.69 0.80 1.77 100

PEFO 5 0.43 86.46 10.06 0.89 0.55 0.62 1.42 100

SAPE 31 0.88 30.39 63.58 1.46 0.90 1.41 2.26 100

WEEL 6 0.38 37.70 56.66 1.47 0.91 0.92 2.33 100

WEMI 9 0.59 26.83 67.21 1.46 0.90 1.33 2.28 100

WHPE 5 0.37 29.53 67.67 0.74 0.45 0.44 1.17 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 0.89 35.30 62.84 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.66 100

BAND 3 0.39 26.98 70.54 1.12 0.28 0.21 0.87 100

BLCA 4 0.44 25.68 71.04 1.46 0.37 0.33 1.12 100

CANY 29 1.15 32.46 66.00 0.68 0.17 0.15 0.54 100

CARE 14 0.86 26.87 71.56 0.68 0.17 0.18 0.54 100

GRCA 5 0.35 27.44 70.95 0.71 0.18 0.17 0.56 100

GRSA 0 0.21 36.16 57.33 2.97 0.75 0.50 2.30 100

LAGA 1 0.29 25.67 70.62 1.64 0.42 0.37 1.27 100

MABE 0 0.20 33.23 64.11 1.21 0.30 0.21 0.95 100

MEVE 64 1.56 52.43 37.30 4.36 1.10 1.46 3.35 100

PECO 3 0.35 87.02 9.06 1.73 0.44 0.41 1.34 100

PEFO 2 0.29 85.92 11.67 1.07 0.27 0.21 0.85 100

SAPE 18 0.70 27.84 68.80 1.47 0.37 0.39 1.13 100

WEEL 4 0.30 34.05 62.90 1.38 0.35 0.24 1.08 100

WEMI 6 0.44 21.26 75.66 1.32 0.33 0.40 1.03 100

WHPE 2 0.28 27.58 70.65 0.80 0.20 0.14 0.63 100

SCR with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.55 65.36 30.00 2.07 0.52 0.37 1.68 100

BAND 1 0.23 77.34 17.85 2.15 0.54 0.46 1.66 100

BLCA 1 0.23 63.67 30.05 2.79 0.71 0.64 2.15 100

CANY 21 0.71 73.31 23.52 1.40 0.35 0.30 1.11 100

CARE 6 0.42 79.41 15.17 2.38 0.60 0.60 1.85 100

GRCA 2 0.19 96.44 0.40 1.41 0.36 0.30 1.11 100

GRSA 0 0.15 74.85 21.43 1.68 0.42 0.30 1.32 100

LAGA 0 0.19 69.03 25.79 2.34 0.59 0.44 1.82 100

MABE 0 0.10 91.61 3.38 2.25 0.57 0.43 1.77 100

MEVE 51 1.49 86.12 1.17 5.50 1.39 1.60 4.22 100

PECO 0 0.22 75.75 14.19 4.46 1.13 1.03 3.44 100

PEFO 1 0.18 90.20 2.93 3.02 0.76 0.75 2.33 100

SAPE 8 0.51 89.39 5.25 2.34 0.59 0.60 1.83 100

WEEL 0 0.16 88.26 6.73 2.23 0.56 0.45 1.77 100

WEMI 2 0.28 71.48 20.35 3.56 0.90 0.97 2.74 100

WHPE 1 0.20 70.34 25.22 2.00 0.50 0.39 1.55 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 96 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 15 0.81 31.17 63.37 1.30 0.80 1.33 2.03 100

BAND 20 0.81 28.33 63.99 1.89 1.16 1.69 2.94 100

BLCA 9 0.53 21.84 73.75 1.06 0.65 1.04 1.65 100

CANY 22 1.04 23.62 71.52 1.13 0.70 1.26 1.76 100

CARE 5 0.38 34.41 62.98 0.66 0.40 0.48 1.07 100

GRCA 3 0.33 45.95 51.86 0.55 0.34 0.36 0.92 100

GRSA 3 0.33 82.46 13.08 1.16 0.71 0.76 1.83 100

LAGA 5 0.44 25.09 67.37 1.91 1.17 1.50 2.97 100

MABE 0 0.25 28.79 63.57 2.12 1.30 0.81 3.42 100

MEVE 95 2.18 50.54 42.30 1.67 1.03 1.84 2.63 100

PECO 8 0.52 43.31 54.53 0.56 0.34 0.37 0.89 100

PEFO 5 0.25 91.13 1.98 1.75 1.08 1.27 2.80 100

SAPE 43 1.03 34.16 58.88 1.69 1.04 1.59 2.64 100

WEEL 5 0.42 34.33 58.68 1.81 1.11 1.22 2.86 100

WEMI 23 0.82 31.35 66.25 0.58 0.36 0.54 0.92 100

WHPE 3 0.39 33.90 60.27 1.53 0.94 0.95 2.41 100

Baseline - Consent Decree 

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 12 0.65 29.26 66.96 1.65 0.42 0.45 1.27 100

BAND 10 0.57 52.51 41.86 2.54 0.64 0.47 1.97 100

BLCA 5 0.41 28.10 70.16 0.78 0.20 0.14 0.62 100

CANY 17 0.85 30.97 66.94 0.92 0.23 0.21 0.73 100

CARE 5 0.26 91.08 1.83 3.13 0.79 0.70 2.47 100

GRCA 3 0.24 42.65 55.95 0.62 0.16 0.12 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.24 27.92 70.46 0.73 0.18 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 1 0.33 22.49 73.90 1.64 0.41 0.29 1.26 100

MABE 0 0.18 27.59 70.65 0.80 0.20 0.13 0.63 100

MEVE 76 1.90 42.51 53.81 1.58 0.40 0.48 1.23 100

PECO 5 0.36 30.99 66.44 1.17 0.30 0.18 0.91 100

PEFO 3 0.18 28.46 69.86 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.61 100

SAPE 34 0.81 28.26 67.95 1.66 0.42 0.43 1.29 100

WEEL 4 0.33 32.22 63.43 1.95 0.49 0.38 1.52 100

WEMI 16 0.64 31.41 61.73 2.93 0.74 0.94 2.25 100

WHPE 0 0.31 44.36 54.39 0.55 0.14 0.11 0.44 100

SCR with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 3 0.40 71.69 24.62 1.62 0.41 0.38 1.28 100

BAND 4 0.34 88.62 1.28 4.56 1.15 0.82 3.57 100

BLCA 2 0.23 63.19 31.87 2.18 0.55 0.48 1.73 100

CANY 7 0.49 68.91 25.21 2.60 0.66 0.61 2.02 100

CARE 1 0.21 95.28 0.28 1.99 0.50 0.40 1.56 100

GRCA 0 0.16 76.67 19.97 1.49 0.38 0.28 1.21 100

GRSA 0 0.16 60.88 33.29 2.69 0.68 0.28 2.19 100

LAGA 0 0.19 62.39 28.98 3.83 0.97 0.88 2.95 100

MABE 0 0.11 71.61 22.02 2.88 0.73 0.51 2.26 100

MEVE 55 1.38 72.26 22.52 2.24 0.57 0.68 1.74 100

PECO 0 0.25 65.21 27.80 3.13 0.79 0.65 2.42 100

PEFO 0 0.15 95.43 0.72 1.73 0.44 0.31 1.38 100

SAPE 9 0.54 68.55 24.65 2.97 0.75 0.78 2.29 100

WEEL 0 0.18 94.98 1.86 1.43 0.36 0.25 1.12 100

WEMI 2 0.41 68.79 27.68 1.56 0.39 0.33 1.24 100

WHPE 0 0.17 83.36 11.34 2.44 0.62 0.32 1.93 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 97 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.72 30.15 61.20 2.06 1.26 2.13 3.19 100

BAND 15 0.71 23.24 69.03 1.92 1.18 1.63 2.99 100

BLCA 9 0.59 23.67 72.71 0.88 0.54 0.82 1.38 100

CANY 19 0.96 32.66 55.96 2.65 1.63 2.99 4.11 100

CARE 9 0.52 48.88 48.12 0.75 0.46 0.56 1.23 100

GRCA 3 0.26 91.93 1.11 1.76 1.08 1.29 2.83 100

GRSA 3 0.27 49.52 46.33 1.06 0.65 0.76 1.68 100

LAGA 5 0.43 22.09 71.73 1.75 1.07 0.58 2.78 100

MABE 0 0.25 27.57 67.94 1.12 0.69 0.91 1.76 100

MEVE 92 2.14 70.75 6.38 5.19 3.19 6.44 8.05 100

PECO 12 0.58 54.64 39.46 1.53 0.94 0.97 2.45 100

PEFO 1 0.24 88.09 6.50 1.41 0.87 0.86 2.28 100

SAPE 34 0.88 39.44 54.36 1.46 0.90 1.58 2.27 100

WEEL 4 0.38 22.78 73.96 0.83 0.51 0.60 1.31 100

WEMI 15 0.65 30.94 64.97 1.04 0.64 0.76 1.65 100

WHPE 4 0.37 24.02 69.82 1.56 0.96 1.20 2.46 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.66 29.12 65.81 2.19 0.55 0.65 1.68 100

BAND 8 0.61 31.91 64.13 1.75 0.44 0.40 1.36 100

BLCA 7 0.46 33.18 65.04 0.79 0.20 0.18 0.62 100

CANY 14 0.79 32.64 60.84 2.79 0.70 0.88 2.14 100

CARE 4 0.36 91.10 1.19 3.36 0.85 0.90 2.60 100

GRCA 0 0.19 52.76 43.76 1.54 0.39 0.32 1.23 100

GRSA 1 0.21 23.53 72.94 1.57 0.40 0.34 1.22 100

LAGA 3 0.33 21.25 74.88 1.79 0.45 0.16 1.47 100

MABE 0 0.18 22.58 74.94 1.09 0.27 0.27 0.85 100

MEVE 64 1.74 43.30 46.82 4.20 1.06 1.40 3.22 100

PECO 5 0.42 34.27 62.29 1.50 0.38 0.39 1.16 100

PEFO 1 0.17 72.31 23.90 1.69 0.43 0.30 1.36 100

SAPE 18 0.72 27.03 68.03 2.14 0.54 0.62 1.64 100

WEEL 2 0.35 23.08 74.48 1.07 0.27 0.28 0.83 100

WEMI 7 0.50 30.19 67.61 0.97 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

WHPE 2 0.28 90.86 5.64 1.60 0.40 0.26 1.24 100

SCR with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 5 0.39 66.45 24.89 3.74 0.94 1.10 2.87 100

BAND 2 0.36 60.70 32.23 3.11 0.79 0.78 2.39 100

BLCA 0 0.27 62.45 33.46 1.79 0.45 0.45 1.40 100

CANY 8 0.52 66.25 28.82 2.12 0.53 0.65 1.63 100

CARE 1 0.26 65.12 29.81 2.21 0.56 0.60 1.71 100

GRCA 0 0.15 82.69 13.89 1.51 0.38 0.31 1.22 100

GRSA 0 0.13 80.33 15.48 1.87 0.47 0.39 1.46 100

LAGA 0 0.19 73.90 22.29 1.70 0.43 0.32 1.36 100

MABE 0 0.09 71.55 22.59 2.72 0.69 0.33 2.12 100

MEVE 57 1.65 78.64 12.83 3.68 0.93 1.08 2.83 100

PECO 1 0.29 75.16 18.97 2.57 0.65 0.67 1.98 100

PEFO 0 0.15 90.18 5.49 1.94 0.49 0.34 1.56 100

SAPE 7 0.49 92.31 2.56 2.26 0.57 0.54 1.76 100

WEEL 0 0.16 60.48 35.63 1.70 0.43 0.43 1.33 100

WEMI 3 0.33 81.23 8.10 4.55 1.15 1.47 3.50 100

WHPE 0 0.17 61.59 33.11 2.40 0.61 0.41 1.89 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 98 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 1.05 38.73 59.14 0.54 0.33 0.40 0.86 100

BAND 9 0.54 77.25 16.22 1.66 1.02 1.24 2.61 100

BLCA 10 0.58 27.97 66.50 1.39 0.86 1.12 2.16 100

CANY 35 1.47 36.32 61.24 0.61 0.38 0.47 0.99 100

CARE 18 1.11 30.71 66.66 0.64 0.39 0.59 1.01 100

GRCA 7 0.48 31.01 66.45 0.63 0.39 0.51 1.00 100

GRSA 1 0.29 76.95 15.10 2.18 1.34 1.00 3.43 100

LAGA 4 0.40 40.66 56.73 0.68 0.42 0.44 1.09 100

MABE 1 0.24 69.36 25.32 1.36 0.84 0.94 2.18 100

MEVE 97 1.94 55.06 37.27 1.83 1.13 1.84 2.87 100

PECO 6 0.48 32.92 63.69 0.95 0.58 0.38 1.49 100

PEFO 5 0.44 29.28 67.84 0.68 0.42 0.71 1.07 100

SAPE 33 0.89 31.06 63.04 1.43 0.88 1.38 2.22 100

WEEL 6 0.38 38.50 56.07 1.42 0.88 0.88 2.25 100

WEMI 10 0.59 27.20 66.98 1.42 0.88 1.30 2.23 100

WHPE 5 0.37 30.24 67.03 0.72 0.44 0.43 1.14 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 0.88 35.06 63.08 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.66 100

BAND 3 0.38 26.97 70.54 1.12 0.29 0.20 0.87 100

BLCA 4 0.42 25.63 71.10 1.45 0.37 0.33 1.12 100

CANY 29 1.14 32.53 65.94 0.68 0.17 0.15 0.54 100

CARE 13 0.86 26.89 71.54 0.68 0.18 0.18 0.54 100

GRCA 5 0.36 27.72 70.68 0.70 0.18 0.16 0.55 100

GRSA 0 0.21 36.09 57.39 2.96 0.76 0.50 2.30 100

LAGA 1 0.28 36.17 62.10 0.77 0.20 0.14 0.61 100

MABE 0 0.20 33.07 64.29 1.19 0.31 0.21 0.94 100

MEVE 64 1.55 71.87 17.66 4.45 1.15 1.45 3.43 100

PECO 2 0.34 87.02 9.05 1.73 0.45 0.41 1.35 100

PEFO 2 0.29 85.93 11.66 1.07 0.28 0.21 0.85 100

SAPE 18 0.69 27.73 68.93 1.46 0.38 0.39 1.12 100

WEEL 4 0.30 33.81 63.19 1.36 0.35 0.23 1.07 100

WEMI 6 0.43 21.27 75.64 1.32 0.34 0.40 1.03 100

WHPE 2 0.28 27.76 70.47 0.80 0.21 0.13 0.63 100

SCR with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.54 65.23 30.13 2.06 0.53 0.37 1.68 100

BAND 1 0.23 77.34 17.84 2.15 0.55 0.45 1.67 100

BLCA 1 0.22 63.62 30.10 2.78 0.72 0.64 2.15 100

CANY 18 0.72 73.40 23.44 1.40 0.36 0.30 1.11 100

CARE 6 0.42 79.42 15.13 2.38 0.61 0.60 1.85 100

GRCA 2 0.18 96.43 0.39 1.41 0.36 0.30 1.11 100

GRSA 0 0.15 74.87 21.40 1.67 0.43 0.30 1.32 100

LAGA 0 0.18 68.84 25.92 2.36 0.61 0.44 1.84 100

MABE 0 0.10 91.61 3.37 2.24 0.58 0.43 1.77 100

MEVE 51 1.47 86.03 1.25 5.49 1.41 1.59 4.23 100

PECO 0 0.22 75.74 14.19 4.45 1.15 1.02 3.45 100

PEFO 1 0.18 90.19 2.93 3.01 0.78 0.75 2.34 100

SAPE 7 0.50 89.42 5.22 2.34 0.60 0.60 1.83 100

WEEL 0 0.16 88.25 6.72 2.23 0.57 0.45 1.77 100

WEMI 2 0.27 60.68 33.58 2.45 0.63 0.76 1.89 100

WHPE 0 0.20 70.42 25.14 1.99 0.51 0.39 1.55 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 99 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 15 0.84 33.46 63.61 0.73 0.45 0.58 1.17 100

BAND 20 0.81 53.16 38.54 2.16 1.33 1.41 3.39 100

BLCA 10 0.54 22.21 73.48 1.04 0.64 1.01 1.62 100

CANY 22 1.06 24.09 71.18 1.10 0.68 1.23 1.72 100

CARE 5 0.38 35.19 62.28 0.64 0.39 0.47 1.04 100

GRCA 3 0.34 47.06 50.82 0.54 0.33 0.35 0.90 100

GRSA 2 0.34 83.04 12.72 1.10 0.68 0.71 1.74 100

LAGA 4 0.45 81.97 13.16 1.28 0.79 0.74 2.05 100

MABE 0 0.25 28.95 63.55 2.07 1.28 0.79 3.36 100

MEVE 96 2.18 51.65 41.36 1.63 1.00 1.80 2.56 100

PECO 8 0.52 44.34 53.57 0.54 0.33 0.36 0.86 100

PEFO 5 0.27 91.57 1.90 1.66 1.02 1.20 2.65 100

SAPE 43 1.04 34.95 58.17 1.67 1.03 1.57 2.61 100

WEEL 5 0.43 35.21 57.78 1.81 1.12 1.23 2.86 100

WEMI 25 0.81 32.08 65.59 0.56 0.35 0.53 0.90 100

WHPE 4 0.41 34.54 59.79 1.49 0.92 0.93 2.35 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 12 0.65 29.14 67.09 1.64 0.42 0.45 1.27 100

BAND 10 0.56 52.56 41.80 2.54 0.65 0.47 1.98 100

BLCA 4 0.42 20.20 77.31 1.08 0.28 0.30 0.83 100

CANY 17 0.85 30.88 67.04 0.92 0.24 0.20 0.73 100

CARE 5 0.26 91.06 1.83 3.12 0.81 0.70 2.47 100

GRCA 3 0.24 42.57 56.03 0.62 0.16 0.12 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.23 28.00 70.38 0.73 0.19 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 1 0.32 22.47 73.91 1.64 0.42 0.29 1.27 100

MABE 0 0.19 28.63 66.47 2.26 0.58 0.24 1.82 100

MEVE 75 1.89 42.10 54.26 1.56 0.40 0.47 1.22 100

PECO 5 0.35 30.81 66.63 1.17 0.30 0.18 0.91 100

PEFO 3 0.18 28.47 69.84 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.61 100

SAPE 34 0.80 28.16 68.06 1.65 0.42 0.42 1.29 100

WEEL 4 0.33 24.93 71.68 1.47 0.38 0.41 1.13 100

WEMI 13 0.63 31.35 61.78 2.92 0.75 0.93 2.26 100

WHPE 0 0.30 44.20 54.55 0.55 0.14 0.11 0.44 100

SCR with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 3 0.39 62.19 33.21 2.04 0.53 0.41 1.61 100

BAND 4 0.34 88.61 1.28 4.55 1.17 0.82 3.58 100

BLCA 1 0.22 63.23 31.80 2.19 0.56 0.48 1.74 100

CANY 7 0.48 68.81 25.31 2.59 0.67 0.60 2.02 100

CARE 1 0.21 95.27 0.28 1.98 0.51 0.40 1.56 100

GRCA 0 0.16 74.95 21.85 1.42 0.36 0.27 1.15 100

GRSA 0 0.15 61.60 34.46 1.76 0.45 0.14 1.59 100

LAGA 0 0.18 62.36 28.99 3.83 0.99 0.88 2.95 100

MABE 0 0.11 92.60 4.60 1.25 0.32 0.26 0.98 100

MEVE 55 1.37 71.90 22.90 2.22 0.57 0.67 1.74 100

PECO 0 0.25 65.25 27.75 3.13 0.81 0.65 2.42 100

PEFO 0 0.14 95.43 0.71 1.73 0.44 0.31 1.38 100

SAPE 8 0.54 68.50 24.70 2.96 0.76 0.78 2.30 100

WEEL 0 0.18 94.97 1.86 1.42 0.37 0.25 1.13 100

WEMI 2 0.39 68.52 27.95 1.55 0.40 0.33 1.24 100

WHPE 0 0.17 83.35 11.34 2.43 0.63 0.32 1.93 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 100 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.74 30.46 60.93 2.04 1.26 2.14 3.18 100

BAND 15 0.71 23.48 68.94 1.88 1.16 1.60 2.93 100

BLCA 9 0.59 37.08 55.34 1.83 1.13 1.78 2.84 100

CANY 20 0.97 32.92 55.93 2.59 1.60 2.93 4.03 100

CARE 9 0.53 49.90 47.20 0.72 0.45 0.54 1.19 100

GRCA 3 0.27 92.31 1.07 1.68 1.03 1.22 2.69 100

GRSA 3 0.27 24.99 69.23 1.46 0.90 1.12 2.30 100

LAGA 5 0.43 22.20 71.74 1.71 1.06 0.56 2.72 100

MABE 0 0.24 24.98 71.07 0.97 0.60 0.87 1.52 100

MEVE 93 2.15 71.14 6.46 5.08 3.13 6.31 7.88 100

PECO 12 0.59 55.50 38.80 1.48 0.91 0.94 2.37 100

PEFO 1 0.25 88.57 6.28 1.34 0.83 0.81 2.17 100

SAPE 35 0.88 28.38 62.72 2.09 1.29 2.27 3.25 100

WEEL 5 0.39 23.21 73.59 0.82 0.50 0.58 1.29 100

WEMI 15 0.65 31.61 64.42 1.01 0.63 0.73 1.61 100

WHPE 4 0.38 24.18 69.77 1.52 0.94 1.18 2.41 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.63 28.93 66.06 2.16 0.56 0.63 1.67 100

BAND 8 0.60 23.30 73.35 1.46 0.38 0.38 1.13 100

BLCA 7 0.44 33.38 64.83 0.79 0.20 0.18 0.62 100

CANY 13 0.78 32.54 60.94 2.78 0.72 0.88 2.14 100

CARE 4 0.35 91.08 1.19 3.35 0.86 0.90 2.61 100

GRCA 0 0.18 52.85 43.67 1.54 0.40 0.32 1.23 100

GRSA 1 0.21 23.53 72.93 1.57 0.41 0.34 1.23 100

LAGA 3 0.32 21.23 74.90 1.79 0.46 0.16 1.47 100

MABE 0 0.18 22.92 75.41 0.73 0.19 0.18 0.57 100

MEVE 63 1.73 44.56 45.24 4.32 1.11 1.44 3.33 100

PECO 5 0.41 52.81 43.33 1.73 0.45 0.31 1.38 100

PEFO 1 0.17 31.86 65.63 1.13 0.29 0.18 0.92 100

SAPE 17 0.69 26.79 68.32 2.10 0.54 0.62 1.62 100

WEEL 1 0.33 23.22 75.05 0.76 0.19 0.19 0.59 100

WEMI 6 0.49 30.25 67.54 0.97 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

WHPE 2 0.28 90.85 5.63 1.59 0.41 0.26 1.24 100

SCR with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 5 0.37 66.43 24.97 3.71 0.96 1.08 2.86 100

BAND 1 0.35 60.70 32.24 3.09 0.80 0.78 2.39 100

BLCA 0 0.27 70.67 21.77 3.29 0.85 0.88 2.54 100

CANY 8 0.52 68.96 21.08 4.25 1.09 1.35 3.27 100

CARE 1 0.26 65.13 29.80 2.20 0.57 0.60 1.71 100

GRCA 0 0.15 82.72 13.85 1.51 0.39 0.31 1.22 100

GRSA 0 0.12 80.39 15.40 1.87 0.48 0.39 1.47 100

LAGA 0 0.18 74.29 21.99 1.66 0.43 0.29 1.33 100

MABE 0 0.09 71.48 25.07 1.51 0.39 0.38 1.18 100

MEVE 56 1.61 78.45 13.05 3.66 0.94 1.07 2.82 100

PECO 1 0.28 75.07 19.05 2.56 0.66 0.67 1.98 100

PEFO 0 0.15 90.17 5.49 1.94 0.50 0.34 1.56 100

SAPE 6 0.48 92.31 2.55 2.26 0.58 0.54 1.76 100

WEEL 0 0.15 60.50 35.59 1.70 0.44 0.43 1.34 100

WEMI 3 0.32 81.00 8.33 4.54 1.17 1.47 3.50 100

WHPE 0 0.17 61.58 33.11 2.40 0.62 0.41 1.89 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 101 of 148 

SCR/SNCR Hybrid with Inherent SO3 Removal 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 102 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 59 1.92 71.14 23.07 1.46 0.89 1.08 2.36 100

BAND 70 1.31 35.48 59.51 1.32 0.81 0.83 2.06 100

BLCA 40 1.14 52.26 45.03 0.71 0.44 0.43 1.13 100

CANY 80 2.59 65.05 28.99 1.51 0.92 1.08 2.44 100

CARE 31 1.97 51.54 43.71 1.15 0.71 1.06 1.83 100

GRCA 14 1.14 42.20 54.25 0.90 0.55 0.65 1.45 100

GRSA 23 0.85 77.31 14.03 2.38 1.46 1.09 3.75 100

LAGA 35 1.15 42.48 54.54 0.77 0.47 0.50 1.24 100

MABE 16 0.67 41.50 54.30 1.08 0.66 0.76 1.70 100

MEVE 184 4.20 84.29 1.94 3.21 1.97 3.57 5.03 100

PECO 53 1.40 43.19 52.60 1.08 0.66 0.76 1.71 100

PEFO 18 1.13 84.94 9.80 1.30 0.79 1.11 2.06 100

SAPE 111 1.78 79.88 8.73 2.70 1.65 2.83 4.20 100

WEEL 34 0.99 40.76 54.57 1.20 0.73 0.85 1.89 100

WEMI 74 1.51 26.70 66.76 1.53 0.94 1.66 2.40 100

WHPE 37 1.00 32.06 63.10 1.28 0.78 0.76 2.02 100

Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 47 1.69 33.57 62.13 1.88 0.48 0.48 1.46 100

BAND 49 1.04 30.40 66.83 1.26 0.32 0.23 0.97 100

BLCA 26 0.95 37.13 57.66 2.28 0.58 0.58 1.76 100

CANY 67 2.26 55.66 38.57 2.53 0.65 0.62 1.98 100

CARE 28 1.81 52.95 42.68 1.91 0.49 0.48 1.49 100

GRCA 12 0.97 38.14 59.75 0.93 0.24 0.19 0.75 100

GRSA 14 0.63 38.82 54.18 3.18 0.81 0.53 2.47 100

LAGA 20 0.86 38.38 59.80 0.81 0.21 0.15 0.65 100

MABE 10 0.54 69.46 25.41 2.29 0.59 0.43 1.83 100

MEVE 157 3.38 75.39 9.84 6.26 1.60 2.09 4.82 100

PECO 35 1.05 80.51 15.41 1.83 0.47 0.36 1.43 100

PEFO 14 0.82 27.95 69.41 1.18 0.30 0.25 0.92 100

SAPE 93 1.40 39.89 53.93 2.71 0.69 0.68 2.09 100

WEEL 19 0.80 37.76 60.62 0.70 0.18 0.19 0.55 100

WEMI 53 1.15 28.74 65.59 2.44 0.62 0.72 1.88 100

WHPE 27 0.75 30.82 66.18 1.36 0.35 0.23 1.06 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 48 1.58 59.46 38.17 1.04 0.26 0.25 0.81 100

BAND 46 0.91 43.89 51.66 2.03 0.52 0.33 1.57 100

BLCA 21 0.84 75.89 18.58 2.44 0.62 0.51 1.95 100

CANY 65 2.17 70.69 23.24 2.66 0.68 0.65 2.08 100

CARE 28 1.64 47.95 50.59 0.64 0.16 0.12 0.53 100

GRCA 11 0.80 53.28 44.13 1.14 0.29 0.23 0.92 100

GRSA 10 0.62 86.10 8.14 2.65 0.68 0.36 2.07 100

LAGA 14 0.70 44.37 50.50 2.27 0.58 0.51 1.76 100

MABE 5 0.47 44.27 51.87 1.72 0.44 0.37 1.33 100

MEVE 158 4.08 86.86 0.25 5.52 1.41 1.73 4.24 100

PECO 28 0.84 57.98 38.73 1.47 0.38 0.29 1.15 100

PEFO 13 0.73 44.95 52.48 1.11 0.28 0.31 0.86 100

SAPE 87 1.42 83.28 10.64 2.63 0.67 0.76 2.02 100

WEEL 14 0.68 51.31 46.89 0.81 0.21 0.14 0.64 100

WEMI 44 1.01 46.23 48.94 2.11 0.54 0.54 1.64 100

WHPE 19 0.70 85.06 9.34 2.56 0.65 0.41 1.99 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 103 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 46 1.76 43.87 46.41 2.37 1.45 2.20 3.70 100

BAND 87 1.86 44.28 49.89 1.45 0.89 1.18 2.31 100

BLCA 54 1.34 35.37 59.23 1.36 0.83 1.04 2.17 100

CANY 67 2.04 83.50 1.79 3.67 2.25 3.05 5.74 100

CARE 24 1.16 33.88 63.47 0.67 0.41 0.49 1.09 100

GRCA 15 0.93 89.85 2.03 2.09 1.28 1.45 3.30 100

GRSA 28 1.00 82.39 12.99 1.20 0.73 0.78 1.90 100

LAGA 63 1.30 81.37 13.32 1.40 0.86 0.81 2.24 100

MABE 20 0.78 28.96 63.27 2.15 1.32 0.80 3.49 100

MEVE 184 4.09 34.40 60.73 1.18 0.72 1.11 1.87 100

PECO 62 1.33 53.02 40.33 1.81 1.11 0.89 2.85 100

PEFO 16 0.79 90.95 1.94 1.81 1.11 1.31 2.89 100

SAPE 125 2.37 71.74 23.38 1.23 0.75 0.94 1.96 100

WEEL 43 1.15 35.15 60.78 1.03 0.63 0.76 1.65 100

WEMI 117 1.85 57.89 29.83 2.89 1.77 3.13 4.49 100

WHPE 40 0.95 55.69 38.20 1.67 1.02 0.74 2.67 100

Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 32 1.65 49.70 47.38 1.28 0.33 0.30 1.01 100

BAND 61 1.56 37.39 59.91 1.19 0.30 0.27 0.93 100

BLCA 30 1.15 31.11 65.99 1.28 0.33 0.28 1.02 100

CANY 57 1.73 52.51 43.96 1.55 0.40 0.35 1.23 100

CARE 18 0.82 91.30 1.66 3.11 0.79 0.69 2.46 100

GRCA 10 0.76 44.30 54.26 0.64 0.16 0.12 0.52 100

GRSA 17 0.71 28.48 69.87 0.74 0.19 0.13 0.60 100

LAGA 40 0.94 26.32 71.29 1.07 0.27 0.22 0.84 100

MABE 11 0.56 84.39 12.71 1.31 0.33 0.23 1.03 100

MEVE 162 3.53 85.08 5.44 4.14 1.06 1.04 3.24 100

PECO 41 1.09 41.87 56.64 0.66 0.17 0.13 0.53 100

PEFO 9 0.60 28.65 69.64 0.76 0.19 0.13 0.62 100

SAPE 109 2.01 46.15 47.36 2.82 0.72 0.76 2.19 100

WEEL 24 0.91 30.66 67.44 0.86 0.22 0.14 0.68 100

WEMI 83 1.48 57.20 35.77 3.02 0.77 0.91 2.32 100

WHPE 20 0.86 47.51 47.27 2.35 0.60 0.43 1.84 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 31 1.43 55.35 40.36 1.88 0.48 0.46 1.47 100

BAND 53 1.33 60.05 35.73 1.86 0.47 0.42 1.46 100

BLCA 25 0.92 66.90 25.07 3.61 0.92 0.71 2.79 100

CANY 53 1.57 67.76 28.32 1.73 0.44 0.39 1.37 100

CARE 14 0.67 94.87 0.69 1.98 0.50 0.40 1.55 100

GRCA 10 0.67 58.19 39.68 0.94 0.24 0.18 0.76 100

GRSA 10 0.64 91.77 4.85 1.53 0.39 0.25 1.21 100

LAGA 21 0.78 47.00 46.57 2.86 0.73 0.64 2.20 100

MABE 6 0.48 49.60 44.27 2.83 0.72 0.30 2.28 100

MEVE 170 3.88 85.00 5.76 3.95 1.01 1.22 3.06 100

PECO 32 0.86 58.19 39.90 0.85 0.22 0.17 0.68 100

PEFO 8 0.50 45.50 51.44 1.37 0.35 0.22 1.12 100

SAPE 100 1.80 67.04 26.24 2.93 0.75 0.77 2.27 100

WEEL 19 0.73 45.06 50.20 2.06 0.53 0.56 1.59 100

WEMI 67 1.33 72.37 16.26 4.85 1.24 1.54 3.73 100

WHPE 14 0.69 47.11 50.98 0.85 0.22 0.17 0.68 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 104 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 39 1.82 38.16 50.64 2.67 1.63 2.75 4.15 100

BAND 77 1.51 40.84 49.83 2.33 1.43 1.94 3.63 100

BLCA 30 1.40 29.26 67.79 0.76 0.46 0.52 1.21 100

CANY 57 2.00 64.92 31.30 0.94 0.58 0.72 1.53 100

CARE 25 1.34 43.68 49.81 1.57 0.96 1.51 2.47 100

GRCA 11 0.81 91.83 0.94 1.83 1.12 1.34 2.94 100

GRSA 26 0.82 50.03 45.62 1.12 0.68 0.79 1.76 100

LAGA 40 1.14 25.27 67.60 2.02 1.24 0.66 3.22 100

MABE 15 0.63 36.60 57.88 1.53 0.94 0.65 2.41 100

MEVE 174 4.85 69.32 17.06 3.27 2.00 3.22 5.14 100

PECO 63 1.26 49.00 43.40 1.87 1.15 1.66 2.93 100

PEFO 17 0.74 88.02 6.36 1.46 0.90 0.89 2.36 100

SAPE 127 1.96 80.84 9.41 2.36 1.45 2.22 3.73 100

WEEL 31 0.94 25.57 71.56 0.70 0.43 0.61 1.12 100

WEMI 87 1.69 40.63 54.52 1.17 0.72 1.13 1.84 100

WHPE 48 1.05 48.42 48.68 0.78 0.48 0.39 1.25 100

Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 27 1.49 30.95 67.01 0.89 0.23 0.21 0.71 100

BAND 57 1.20 77.97 17.21 2.11 0.54 0.52 1.65 100

BLCA 21 1.07 27.98 70.17 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.65 100

CANY 48 1.68 70.45 24.81 2.07 0.53 0.49 1.65 100

CARE 23 1.05 52.60 45.24 0.94 0.24 0.20 0.77 100

GRCA 9 0.57 93.89 1.17 2.19 0.56 0.46 1.74 100

GRSA 15 0.64 27.42 70.94 0.76 0.19 0.09 0.60 100

LAGA 28 0.90 23.76 71.98 1.99 0.51 0.18 1.58 100

MABE 8 0.51 27.63 69.59 1.22 0.31 0.28 0.97 100

MEVE 159 3.80 41.19 53.18 2.41 0.62 0.72 1.88 100

PECO 50 1.00 51.25 46.75 0.89 0.23 0.18 0.70 100

PEFO 9 0.53 32.43 65.01 1.15 0.29 0.18 0.93 100

SAPE 97 1.56 37.04 56.49 2.78 0.71 0.83 2.15 100

WEEL 22 0.83 28.10 67.91 1.74 0.44 0.44 1.36 100

WEMI 63 1.34 36.23 61.45 1.00 0.26 0.29 0.77 100

WHPE 27 0.89 91.09 5.38 1.60 0.41 0.26 1.25 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 26 1.33 83.64 10.14 2.75 0.70 0.54 2.23 100

BAND 51 1.13 41.90 51.74 2.81 0.72 0.65 2.17 100

BLCA 18 0.94 57.89 37.54 1.99 0.51 0.51 1.56 100

CANY 44 1.67 66.35 31.36 1.01 0.26 0.22 0.81 100

CARE 22 0.96 92.50 0.40 3.06 0.78 0.86 2.39 100

GRCA 8 0.58 68.68 28.47 1.26 0.32 0.26 1.01 100

GRSA 7 0.50 64.81 31.80 1.51 0.39 0.31 1.18 100

LAGA 17 0.75 40.27 54.41 2.46 0.63 0.23 2.01 100

MABE 5 0.41 43.33 53.10 1.57 0.40 0.36 1.24 100

MEVE 163 4.42 78.39 13.91 3.32 0.85 0.95 2.58 100

PECO 40 0.90 80.27 16.55 1.44 0.37 0.24 1.14 100

PEFO 8 0.52 83.24 12.76 1.79 0.46 0.32 1.44 100

SAPE 92 1.57 89.32 5.71 2.18 0.56 0.52 1.70 100

WEEL 13 0.67 45.92 49.14 2.16 0.55 0.55 1.69 100

WEMI 57 1.14 48.95 47.95 1.37 0.35 0.29 1.09 100

WHPE 21 0.72 51.46 46.46 0.92 0.23 0.19 0.73 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 105 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 16 0.82 25.92 68.87 1.30 0.79 1.06 2.06 100

BAND 1 0.31 41.96 53.16 1.24 0.75 0.94 1.95 100

BLCA 2 0.35 31.77 66.43 0.47 0.29 0.29 0.75 100

CANY 28 1.10 43.62 52.48 0.91 0.55 1.03 1.41 100

CARE 12 0.76 26.38 71.01 0.64 0.38 0.58 1.01 100

GRCA 5 0.31 31.06 66.09 0.72 0.44 0.52 1.17 100

GRSA 0 0.18 87.77 6.73 1.38 0.83 1.12 2.17 100

LAGA 1 0.26 36.35 60.88 0.72 0.44 0.46 1.16 100

MABE 0 0.18 23.69 72.07 1.08 0.65 0.82 1.69 100

MEVE 55 1.51 47.09 35.97 3.88 2.35 4.67 6.04 100

PECO 2 0.29 24.39 68.71 1.72 1.04 1.48 2.67 100

PEFO 2 0.25 84.76 11.37 0.99 0.60 0.69 1.59 100

SAPE 10 0.61 26.56 68.07 1.32 0.80 1.20 2.05 100

WEEL 2 0.27 31.55 66.50 0.52 0.31 0.29 0.82 100

WEMI 3 0.37 22.71 69.34 1.89 1.14 1.99 2.93 100

WHPE 2 0.24 27.68 69.49 0.76 0.46 0.42 1.20 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.69 25.34 71.69 1.31 0.33 0.31 1.03 100

BAND 1 0.24 43.57 53.42 1.34 0.34 0.29 1.04 100

BLCA 2 0.29 23.45 74.26 0.99 0.25 0.26 0.78 100

CANY 22 1.00 38.19 59.52 1.01 0.26 0.23 0.80 100

CARE 11 0.57 26.93 71.52 0.67 0.17 0.17 0.53 100

GRCA 4 0.27 30.85 67.43 0.76 0.19 0.15 0.61 100

GRSA 0 0.14 21.45 76.75 0.80 0.20 0.17 0.63 100

LAGA 0 0.19 28.88 69.14 0.89 0.23 0.16 0.70 100

MABE 0 0.14 20.45 75.64 1.73 0.44 0.40 1.34 100

MEVE 38 1.35 35.69 59.62 2.00 0.51 0.63 1.55 100

PECO 1 0.23 25.62 70.23 1.82 0.47 0.44 1.41 100

PEFO 2 0.19 25.42 72.19 1.06 0.27 0.23 0.84 100

SAPE 7 0.44 27.36 69.47 1.39 0.36 0.35 1.08 100

WEEL 0 0.22 33.65 63.73 1.17 0.30 0.22 0.93 100

WEMI 2 0.31 30.63 61.38 3.48 0.89 0.91 2.70 100

WHPE 2 0.19 28.38 69.83 0.81 0.21 0.13 0.64 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.53 42.09 54.03 1.70 0.44 0.40 1.34 100

BAND 1 0.19 62.60 30.98 2.86 0.73 0.59 2.23 100

BLCA 1 0.20 39.98 56.80 1.40 0.36 0.37 1.10 100

CANY 17 0.79 52.29 45.41 1.01 0.26 0.22 0.81 100

CARE 5 0.41 65.29 29.98 2.07 0.53 0.52 1.62 100

GRCA 2 0.20 47.68 50.00 1.02 0.26 0.21 0.83 100

GRSA 0 0.12 55.89 36.68 3.37 0.86 0.56 2.63 100

LAGA 0 0.15 43.99 50.87 2.28 0.58 0.51 1.78 100

MABE 0 0.10 37.12 59.19 1.64 0.42 0.34 1.29 100

MEVE 35 1.25 51.66 43.17 2.20 0.56 0.70 1.70 100

PECO 0 0.18 62.58 29.19 3.64 0.93 0.82 2.83 100

PEFO 1 0.16 47.86 50.30 0.82 0.21 0.15 0.66 100

SAPE 4 0.33 44.94 50.86 1.84 0.47 0.46 1.43 100

WEEL 0 0.17 51.97 44.59 1.54 0.39 0.29 1.22 100

WEMI 1 0.24 91.72 1.46 3.03 0.77 0.65 2.38 100

WHPE 0 0.15 75.54 19.63 2.15 0.55 0.45 1.68 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 106 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 11 0.68 24.06 72.39 0.91 0.55 0.63 1.46 100

BAND 7 0.49 50.26 40.84 2.33 1.41 1.50 3.66 100

BLCA 4 0.37 19.24 76.63 0.99 0.60 0.99 1.55 100

CANY 16 0.84 30.14 66.46 0.85 0.51 0.67 1.36 100

CARE 4 0.23 29.36 68.45 0.54 0.33 0.45 0.87 100

GRCA 1 0.21 42.87 54.86 0.58 0.35 0.37 0.97 100

GRSA 0 0.20 27.46 69.95 0.68 0.41 0.39 1.10 100

LAGA 0 0.28 23.68 72.69 0.93 0.56 0.66 1.48 100

MABE 0 0.16 27.20 65.28 2.09 1.27 0.76 3.40 100

MEVE 73 1.79 37.50 56.98 1.29 0.78 1.40 2.05 100

PECO 3 0.31 38.08 53.60 2.22 1.34 1.25 3.51 100

PEFO 2 0.16 28.11 69.15 0.71 0.43 0.44 1.17 100

SAPE 27 0.73 26.46 67.64 1.45 0.88 1.29 2.29 100

WEEL 1 0.28 23.98 70.42 1.36 0.82 1.31 2.11 100

WEMI 9 0.54 43.96 46.81 2.18 1.32 2.34 3.39 100

WHPE 0 0.25 30.07 67.71 0.57 0.35 0.39 0.92 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.54 23.97 72.89 1.37 0.35 0.35 1.07 100

BAND 4 0.40 31.04 66.80 0.95 0.24 0.22 0.75 100

BLCA 1 0.29 25.16 72.63 0.98 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

CANY 13 0.65 23.43 73.82 1.20 0.31 0.31 0.94 100

CARE 3 0.18 31.45 66.94 0.71 0.18 0.15 0.57 100

GRCA 1 0.16 43.73 54.87 0.62 0.16 0.11 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.14 27.52 70.87 0.72 0.19 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 0 0.21 25.77 71.45 1.20 0.31 0.33 0.94 100

MABE 0 0.12 26.89 71.16 0.87 0.22 0.16 0.69 100

MEVE 52 1.40 60.18 31.05 3.70 0.95 1.26 2.86 100

PECO 3 0.24 40.91 57.63 0.65 0.17 0.13 0.52 100

PEFO 0 0.13 28.41 69.90 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.62 100

SAPE 16 0.59 26.83 69.85 1.45 0.37 0.35 1.14 100

WEEL 0 0.20 24.64 72.13 1.40 0.36 0.38 1.09 100

WEMI 6 0.43 24.32 73.64 0.90 0.23 0.19 0.72 100

WHPE 0 0.17 31.55 67.09 0.60 0.15 0.12 0.49 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 4 0.41 51.75 45.58 1.17 0.30 0.28 0.93 100

BAND 4 0.33 46.88 47.48 2.49 0.64 0.59 1.93 100

BLCA 0 0.21 35.70 60.98 1.43 0.37 0.40 1.11 100

CANY 7 0.47 40.11 56.08 1.66 0.42 0.43 1.30 100

CARE 1 0.14 59.12 33.68 3.11 0.80 0.87 2.43 100

GRCA 0 0.14 93.65 1.24 2.28 0.58 0.46 1.79 100

GRSA 0 0.13 91.65 4.99 1.52 0.39 0.25 1.21 100

LAGA 0 0.16 48.93 49.01 0.91 0.23 0.18 0.73 100

MABE 0 0.09 45.28 52.01 1.19 0.30 0.27 0.94 100

MEVE 49 1.25 83.08 9.44 3.25 0.83 0.85 2.54 100

PECO 0 0.20 59.06 34.65 2.85 0.73 0.47 2.24 100

PEFO 0 0.10 95.25 0.91 1.72 0.44 0.33 1.36 100

SAPE 7 0.47 67.26 28.20 2.01 0.51 0.46 1.56 100

WEEL 0 0.15 42.20 53.45 1.89 0.48 0.51 1.46 100

WEMI 0 0.35 58.45 39.34 0.98 0.25 0.19 0.79 100

WHPE 0 0.14 70.07 25.44 2.05 0.53 0.27 1.63 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 107 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.60 28.75 65.62 1.35 0.81 1.33 2.14 100

BAND 8 0.54 22.07 72.47 1.34 0.81 1.23 2.09 100

BLCA 2 0.38 34.19 62.97 0.72 0.43 0.54 1.15 100

CANY 14 0.71 29.97 59.10 2.54 1.54 2.91 3.94 100

CARE 3 0.32 86.40 1.13 3.02 1.83 2.88 4.74 100

GRCA 0 0.16 51.56 42.85 1.42 0.86 1.00 2.30 100

GRSA 1 0.17 19.79 77.41 0.69 0.42 0.59 1.10 100

LAGA 2 0.29 36.29 60.25 0.89 0.54 0.59 1.44 100

MABE 0 0.16 31.87 65.36 0.70 0.42 0.53 1.12 100

MEVE 60 1.67 38.31 45.74 3.66 2.22 4.38 5.69 100

PECO 3 0.35 51.53 42.28 1.61 0.98 1.01 2.59 100

PEFO 0 0.14 31.20 64.81 1.05 0.64 0.58 1.73 100

SAPE 13 0.63 34.16 60.15 1.34 0.81 1.43 2.10 100

WEEL 0 0.25 23.83 70.37 1.42 0.86 1.27 2.25 100

WEMI 4 0.45 21.90 69.56 2.19 1.33 1.52 3.49 100

WHPE 1 0.26 22.07 72.11 1.47 0.89 1.11 2.34 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.52 29.53 67.07 1.47 0.38 0.40 1.16 100

BAND 3 0.37 23.82 72.96 1.41 0.36 0.36 1.10 100

BLCA 0 0.28 25.40 72.77 0.80 0.20 0.19 0.64 100

CANY 12 0.57 38.31 60.22 0.65 0.17 0.14 0.52 100

CARE 2 0.23 31.26 65.22 1.53 0.39 0.39 1.20 100

GRCA 0 0.12 52.37 44.18 1.52 0.39 0.31 1.22 100

GRSA 1 0.14 27.01 70.46 1.12 0.29 0.22 0.89 100

LAGA 0 0.21 20.74 75.52 1.71 0.44 0.17 1.41 100

MABE 0 0.11 33.14 63.55 1.53 0.39 0.19 1.20 100

MEVE 48 1.27 41.93 48.61 4.01 1.03 1.33 3.10 100

PECO 1 0.27 46.70 51.27 0.91 0.23 0.15 0.73 100

PEFO 0 0.11 31.59 65.92 1.12 0.29 0.18 0.91 100

SAPE 7 0.50 26.74 68.42 2.08 0.53 0.62 1.61 100

WEEL 0 0.20 20.88 76.49 1.15 0.30 0.29 0.90 100

WEMI 3 0.35 45.71 42.80 4.96 1.27 1.43 3.84 100

WHPE 0 0.20 22.74 73.74 1.56 0.40 0.34 1.23 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 5 0.42 66.38 31.47 0.94 0.24 0.20 0.76 100

BAND 1 0.28 41.32 54.32 1.91 0.49 0.48 1.48 100

BLCA 0 0.22 60.66 34.77 1.98 0.51 0.54 1.55 100

CANY 6 0.46 51.59 40.94 3.17 0.81 1.03 2.45 100

CARE 2 0.23 94.91 0.80 1.88 0.48 0.44 1.49 100

GRCA 0 0.12 67.40 29.80 1.23 0.32 0.25 1.00 100

GRSA 0 0.10 44.40 52.18 1.52 0.39 0.30 1.21 100

LAGA 0 0.16 52.82 44.00 1.39 0.36 0.35 1.09 100

MABE 0 0.08 52.18 43.56 1.97 0.50 0.24 1.55 100

MEVE 45 1.29 60.35 33.03 2.85 0.73 0.84 2.20 100

PECO 1 0.22 62.64 34.84 1.13 0.29 0.19 0.91 100

PEFO 0 0.11 82.86 13.17 1.77 0.45 0.31 1.44 100

SAPE 5 0.41 46.26 48.36 2.31 0.59 0.68 1.79 100

WEEL 0 0.16 53.10 44.74 0.94 0.24 0.21 0.76 100

WEMI 1 0.29 55.93 41.00 1.32 0.34 0.38 1.03 100

WHPE 0 0.16 51.89 46.10 0.89 0.23 0.19 0.71 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 108 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 16 0.83 25.00 69.90 1.28 0.78 1.04 2.02 100

BAND 1 0.32 25.12 71.09 1.01 0.61 0.61 1.57 100

BLCA 3 0.36 23.37 71.60 1.28 0.78 0.99 1.98 100

CANY 27 1.07 40.57 55.69 0.86 0.53 1.00 1.35 100

CARE 12 0.78 25.24 72.22 0.62 0.38 0.56 0.99 100

GRCA 5 0.31 29.84 67.36 0.71 0.43 0.51 1.15 100

GRSA 0 0.19 32.82 57.23 2.66 1.62 1.52 4.16 100

LAGA 0 0.26 34.98 62.29 0.71 0.43 0.46 1.14 100

MABE 0 0.18 19.11 76.53 1.10 0.67 0.86 1.73 100

MEVE 56 1.49 45.92 37.44 3.81 2.32 4.60 5.92 100

PECO 2 0.29 84.16 9.33 1.63 0.99 1.33 2.56 100

PEFO 2 0.25 23.63 72.55 0.97 0.59 0.72 1.54 100

SAPE 11 0.63 25.41 69.31 1.29 0.79 1.19 2.01 100

WEEL 1 0.27 30.10 67.99 0.51 0.31 0.29 0.80 100

WEMI 3 0.38 31.78 59.74 2.05 1.25 1.98 3.19 100

WHPE 2 0.24 26.23 70.99 0.74 0.45 0.42 1.17 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.69 25.31 71.71 1.31 0.34 0.31 1.02 100

BAND 1 0.23 43.57 53.42 1.34 0.34 0.29 1.03 100

BLCA 2 0.28 23.45 74.26 1.00 0.26 0.26 0.77 100

CANY 22 0.99 38.13 59.58 1.01 0.26 0.23 0.80 100

CARE 10 0.57 26.92 71.52 0.68 0.17 0.17 0.53 100

GRCA 4 0.27 30.84 67.43 0.76 0.20 0.15 0.61 100

GRSA 0 0.14 21.45 76.75 0.80 0.21 0.17 0.62 100

LAGA 0 0.19 28.87 69.14 0.89 0.23 0.16 0.70 100

MABE 0 0.14 20.45 75.64 1.74 0.44 0.40 1.33 100

MEVE 38 1.35 35.54 59.78 2.00 0.51 0.63 1.53 100

PECO 1 0.23 25.62 70.23 1.83 0.47 0.44 1.40 100

PEFO 2 0.19 25.42 72.18 1.07 0.27 0.23 0.83 100

SAPE 7 0.44 27.35 69.47 1.40 0.36 0.35 1.07 100

WEEL 0 0.22 33.65 63.72 1.18 0.30 0.22 0.92 100

WEMI 2 0.31 30.63 61.38 3.50 0.90 0.91 2.69 100

WHPE 2 0.18 28.38 69.83 0.82 0.21 0.13 0.64 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.53 42.07 54.05 1.71 0.44 0.40 1.33 100

BAND 1 0.19 62.60 30.97 2.88 0.74 0.60 2.22 100

BLCA 1 0.20 39.98 56.79 1.41 0.36 0.37 1.09 100

CANY 17 0.79 52.29 45.42 1.02 0.26 0.22 0.80 100

CARE 5 0.41 65.29 29.98 2.08 0.53 0.52 1.61 100

GRCA 2 0.20 47.67 50.00 1.03 0.26 0.21 0.83 100

GRSA 0 0.12 55.89 36.68 3.39 0.87 0.56 2.61 100

LAGA 0 0.15 43.99 50.85 2.29 0.59 0.51 1.77 100

MABE 0 0.10 37.12 59.18 1.65 0.42 0.34 1.28 100

MEVE 34 1.25 51.49 43.36 2.20 0.56 0.70 1.69 100

PECO 0 0.18 62.57 29.19 3.66 0.94 0.82 2.82 100

PEFO 1 0.16 47.86 50.30 0.82 0.21 0.15 0.66 100

SAPE 4 0.33 48.38 46.01 2.48 0.63 0.60 1.90 100

WEEL 0 0.17 51.97 44.58 1.55 0.40 0.29 1.21 100

WEMI 1 0.24 91.71 1.46 3.04 0.78 0.65 2.36 100

WHPE 0 0.15 75.53 19.63 2.16 0.55 0.45 1.67 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 109 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 11 0.64 26.15 67.85 1.45 0.89 1.39 2.27 100

BAND 7 0.50 48.55 42.63 2.30 1.40 1.49 3.62 100

BLCA 4 0.37 18.38 77.59 0.97 0.59 0.97 1.51 100

CANY 15 0.83 28.77 67.90 0.83 0.51 0.66 1.33 100

CARE 4 0.23 27.98 69.89 0.53 0.32 0.44 0.85 100

GRCA 1 0.20 40.86 56.90 0.57 0.35 0.37 0.95 100

GRSA 0 0.21 26.11 71.35 0.67 0.41 0.39 1.08 100

LAGA 0 0.29 22.65 73.82 0.90 0.55 0.64 1.44 100

MABE 0 0.16 26.26 66.39 2.05 1.25 0.74 3.32 100

MEVE 72 1.82 36.41 58.08 1.29 0.79 1.39 2.04 100

PECO 3 0.31 36.65 55.19 2.17 1.32 1.23 3.43 100

PEFO 2 0.16 26.72 70.61 0.69 0.42 0.43 1.13 100

SAPE 28 0.73 25.48 68.66 1.43 0.87 1.28 2.26 100

WEEL 1 0.29 22.95 71.57 1.32 0.81 1.29 2.06 100

WEMI 9 0.56 18.60 76.08 1.26 0.77 1.32 1.97 100

WHPE 0 0.26 28.49 69.36 0.55 0.33 0.38 0.89 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.54 23.96 72.89 1.38 0.35 0.35 1.07 100

BAND 4 0.40 31.03 66.81 0.95 0.24 0.22 0.74 100

BLCA 1 0.29 25.16 72.63 0.98 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

CANY 13 0.65 23.42 73.82 1.20 0.31 0.31 0.93 100

CARE 3 0.18 31.45 66.94 0.71 0.18 0.15 0.57 100

GRCA 1 0.16 43.73 54.87 0.62 0.16 0.11 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.14 27.52 70.87 0.73 0.19 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 0 0.21 25.77 71.45 1.21 0.31 0.33 0.93 100

MABE 0 0.11 26.89 71.16 0.88 0.22 0.16 0.69 100

MEVE 52 1.40 60.02 31.23 3.71 0.95 1.25 2.84 100

PECO 3 0.24 40.91 57.63 0.65 0.17 0.13 0.52 100

PEFO 0 0.13 28.41 69.90 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.61 100

SAPE 16 0.58 26.82 69.85 1.46 0.37 0.35 1.14 100

WEEL 0 0.20 24.64 72.13 1.41 0.36 0.38 1.08 100

WEMI 6 0.42 24.31 73.65 0.91 0.23 0.19 0.72 100

WHPE 0 0.17 31.55 67.09 0.61 0.16 0.12 0.48 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 3 0.41 51.74 45.58 1.17 0.30 0.28 0.92 100

BAND 4 0.32 46.87 47.48 2.50 0.64 0.59 1.92 100

BLCA 0 0.21 35.70 60.98 1.44 0.37 0.40 1.11 100

CANY 7 0.47 40.11 56.08 1.66 0.43 0.43 1.29 100

CARE 1 0.14 59.11 33.68 3.12 0.80 0.87 2.41 100

GRCA 0 0.14 93.64 1.24 2.29 0.59 0.46 1.78 100

GRSA 0 0.13 91.65 4.98 1.53 0.39 0.25 1.20 100

LAGA 0 0.16 48.93 49.01 0.92 0.23 0.18 0.73 100

MABE 0 0.09 45.28 52.01 1.20 0.31 0.27 0.94 100

MEVE 49 1.25 82.95 9.58 3.26 0.83 0.85 2.53 100

PECO 0 0.20 59.05 34.64 2.87 0.73 0.47 2.23 100

PEFO 0 0.10 95.24 0.91 1.72 0.44 0.33 1.35 100

SAPE 7 0.46 67.20 28.26 2.02 0.52 0.46 1.55 100

WEEL 0 0.15 42.20 53.45 1.90 0.49 0.51 1.46 100

WEMI 0 0.35 58.44 39.34 0.98 0.25 0.19 0.79 100

WHPE 0 0.14 70.07 25.44 2.07 0.53 0.27 1.63 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 110 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.58 26.09 65.91 1.91 1.16 1.95 2.97 100

BAND 8 0.54 21.18 73.48 1.31 0.80 1.19 2.04 100

BLCA 3 0.39 31.74 65.45 0.70 0.43 0.55 1.12 100

CANY 13 0.72 29.11 60.16 2.49 1.52 2.85 3.87 100

CARE 3 0.31 86.04 1.21 3.09 1.88 2.94 4.84 100

GRCA 0 0.16 49.96 44.45 1.42 0.86 1.00 2.29 100

GRSA 1 0.17 25.45 72.07 0.69 0.42 0.28 1.09 100

LAGA 1 0.29 19.38 74.87 1.61 0.98 0.49 2.66 100

MABE 0 0.16 31.67 65.36 0.73 0.45 0.63 1.16 100

MEVE 60 1.66 38.26 45.78 3.66 2.23 4.39 5.68 100

PECO 3 0.36 20.30 74.98 1.21 0.74 0.82 1.96 100

PEFO 0 0.14 69.40 24.51 1.58 0.96 0.97 2.58 100

SAPE 13 0.64 24.73 67.13 1.92 1.17 2.07 2.99 100

WEEL 0 0.26 22.86 71.46 1.39 0.85 1.25 2.20 100

WEMI 4 0.44 37.67 57.85 1.06 0.65 1.12 1.65 100

WHPE 1 0.26 32.19 65.39 0.61 0.37 0.45 0.98 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.52 29.52 67.08 1.47 0.38 0.40 1.15 100

BAND 3 0.37 23.81 72.96 1.42 0.36 0.36 1.09 100

BLCA 0 0.28 25.40 72.77 0.80 0.21 0.19 0.64 100

CANY 12 0.57 38.31 60.22 0.65 0.17 0.14 0.52 100

CARE 2 0.23 31.25 65.23 1.54 0.39 0.39 1.20 100

GRCA 0 0.12 52.36 44.18 1.53 0.39 0.31 1.22 100

GRSA 1 0.14 27.01 70.46 1.13 0.29 0.22 0.89 100

LAGA 0 0.21 20.74 75.52 1.72 0.44 0.17 1.40 100

MABE 0 0.11 33.14 63.55 1.54 0.39 0.19 1.19 100

MEVE 48 1.26 41.89 48.65 4.03 1.03 1.33 3.08 100

PECO 1 0.27 46.68 51.28 0.92 0.24 0.15 0.73 100

PEFO 0 0.11 72.61 23.59 1.70 0.44 0.30 1.37 100

SAPE 7 0.50 26.73 68.43 2.09 0.53 0.62 1.60 100

WEEL 0 0.20 20.87 76.49 1.16 0.30 0.29 0.89 100

WEMI 3 0.35 45.70 42.79 4.98 1.28 1.43 3.82 100

WHPE 0 0.20 22.74 73.73 1.56 0.40 0.34 1.22 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 5 0.42 66.37 31.48 0.95 0.24 0.20 0.76 100

BAND 1 0.27 41.32 54.32 1.92 0.49 0.48 1.47 100

BLCA 0 0.22 60.64 34.79 1.99 0.51 0.54 1.54 100

CANY 6 0.46 51.58 40.95 3.19 0.82 1.03 2.44 100

CARE 2 0.23 94.91 0.80 1.89 0.48 0.44 1.48 100

GRCA 0 0.12 67.40 29.79 1.24 0.32 0.26 0.99 100

GRSA 0 0.10 44.40 52.17 1.53 0.39 0.30 1.21 100

LAGA 0 0.16 52.82 43.99 1.40 0.36 0.35 1.08 100

MABE 0 0.08 52.18 43.55 1.98 0.51 0.24 1.54 100

MEVE 45 1.28 60.30 33.08 2.86 0.73 0.84 2.19 100

PECO 1 0.22 62.63 34.85 1.14 0.29 0.19 0.90 100

PEFO 0 0.10 82.86 13.16 1.78 0.46 0.31 1.43 100

SAPE 5 0.41 46.21 48.41 2.32 0.59 0.68 1.78 100

WEEL 0 0.15 53.10 44.74 0.95 0.24 0.21 0.75 100

WEMI 1 0.29 55.93 41.00 1.33 0.34 0.38 1.02 100

WHPE 0 0.16 51.89 46.10 0.89 0.23 0.19 0.70 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 111 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 1.04 37.90 59.89 0.56 0.35 0.41 0.89 100

BAND 9 0.53 76.32 16.85 1.73 1.07 1.30 2.73 100

BLCA 10 0.58 27.65 66.71 1.42 0.87 1.14 2.21 100

CANY 35 1.44 35.63 61.86 0.63 0.39 0.48 1.02 100

CARE 17 1.10 29.96 67.35 0.65 0.40 0.61 1.03 100

GRCA 7 0.48 30.18 67.22 0.65 0.40 0.53 1.03 100

GRSA 1 0.28 76.24 15.49 2.27 1.39 1.03 3.58 100

LAGA 4 0.40 39.72 57.57 0.70 0.43 0.45 1.13 100

MABE 1 0.24 35.97 61.92 0.56 0.35 0.32 0.89 100

MEVE 100 1.92 53.68 38.69 1.83 1.12 1.82 2.86 100

PECO 6 0.48 51.34 44.27 1.13 0.69 0.80 1.77 100

PEFO 5 0.43 86.46 10.06 0.89 0.55 0.62 1.42 100

SAPE 31 0.88 30.39 63.58 1.46 0.90 1.41 2.26 100

WEEL 6 0.38 37.70 56.66 1.47 0.91 0.92 2.33 100

WEMI 9 0.59 26.83 67.21 1.46 0.90 1.33 2.28 100

WHPE 5 0.37 29.53 67.67 0.74 0.45 0.44 1.17 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 0.89 35.30 62.84 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.66 100

BAND 3 0.39 26.98 70.54 1.12 0.28 0.21 0.87 100

BLCA 4 0.44 25.68 71.04 1.46 0.37 0.33 1.12 100

CANY 29 1.15 32.46 66.00 0.68 0.17 0.15 0.54 100

CARE 14 0.86 26.87 71.56 0.68 0.17 0.18 0.54 100

GRCA 5 0.35 27.44 70.95 0.71 0.18 0.17 0.56 100

GRSA 0 0.21 36.16 57.33 2.97 0.75 0.50 2.30 100

LAGA 1 0.29 25.67 70.62 1.64 0.42 0.37 1.27 100

MABE 0 0.20 33.23 64.11 1.21 0.30 0.21 0.95 100

MEVE 64 1.56 52.43 37.30 4.36 1.10 1.46 3.35 100

PECO 3 0.35 87.02 9.06 1.73 0.44 0.41 1.34 100

PEFO 2 0.29 85.92 11.67 1.07 0.27 0.21 0.85 100

SAPE 18 0.70 27.84 68.80 1.47 0.37 0.39 1.13 100

WEEL 4 0.30 34.05 62.90 1.38 0.35 0.24 1.08 100

WEMI 6 0.44 21.26 75.66 1.32 0.33 0.40 1.03 100

WHPE 2 0.28 27.58 70.65 0.80 0.20 0.14 0.63 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 16 0.75 48.00 48.59 1.52 0.38 0.27 1.23 100

BAND 1 0.32 90.31 5.29 1.95 0.49 0.44 1.52 100

BLCA 2 0.33 43.68 52.01 1.92 0.48 0.44 1.47 100

CANY 26 0.96 53.53 44.16 1.02 0.26 0.22 0.81 100

CARE 12 0.63 42.98 54.86 0.94 0.24 0.24 0.74 100

GRCA 4 0.26 48.96 48.69 1.04 0.26 0.22 0.83 100

GRSA 0 0.20 85.18 9.13 2.62 0.66 0.36 2.04 100

LAGA 0 0.26 49.78 46.48 1.69 0.43 0.32 1.31 100

MABE 0 0.15 51.38 45.10 1.59 0.40 0.28 1.25 100

MEVE 61 1.60 69.53 24.65 2.51 0.63 0.74 1.94 100

PECO 2 0.27 59.61 36.93 1.57 0.40 0.28 1.22 100

PEFO 2 0.26 90.58 6.00 1.50 0.38 0.36 1.18 100

SAPE 10 0.55 44.52 51.19 1.88 0.47 0.50 1.44 100

WEEL 0 0.23 47.88 50.44 0.76 0.19 0.13 0.60 100

WEMI 2 0.35 55.36 38.30 2.76 0.70 0.75 2.12 100

WHPE 2 0.23 84.14 10.39 2.46 0.62 0.47 1.92 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 112 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 15 0.81 31.17 63.37 1.30 0.80 1.33 2.03 100

BAND 20 0.81 28.33 63.99 1.89 1.16 1.69 2.94 100

BLCA 9 0.53 21.84 73.75 1.06 0.65 1.04 1.65 100

CANY 22 1.04 23.62 71.52 1.13 0.70 1.26 1.76 100

CARE 5 0.38 34.41 62.98 0.66 0.40 0.48 1.07 100

GRCA 3 0.33 45.95 51.86 0.55 0.34 0.36 0.92 100

GRSA 3 0.33 82.46 13.08 1.16 0.71 0.76 1.83 100

LAGA 5 0.44 25.09 67.37 1.91 1.17 1.50 2.97 100

MABE 0 0.25 28.79 63.57 2.12 1.30 0.81 3.42 100

MEVE 95 2.18 50.54 42.30 1.67 1.03 1.84 2.63 100

PECO 8 0.52 43.31 54.53 0.56 0.34 0.37 0.89 100

PEFO 5 0.25 91.13 1.98 1.75 1.08 1.27 2.80 100

SAPE 43 1.03 34.16 58.88 1.69 1.04 1.59 2.64 100

WEEL 5 0.42 34.33 58.68 1.81 1.11 1.22 2.86 100

WEMI 23 0.82 31.35 66.25 0.58 0.36 0.54 0.92 100

WHPE 3 0.39 33.90 60.27 1.53 0.94 0.95 2.41 100

Baseline - Consent Decree 

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 12 0.65 29.26 66.96 1.65 0.42 0.45 1.27 100

BAND 10 0.57 52.51 41.86 2.54 0.64 0.47 1.97 100

BLCA 5 0.41 28.10 70.16 0.78 0.20 0.14 0.62 100

CANY 17 0.85 30.97 66.94 0.92 0.23 0.21 0.73 100

CARE 5 0.26 91.08 1.83 3.13 0.79 0.70 2.47 100

GRCA 3 0.24 42.65 55.95 0.62 0.16 0.12 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.24 27.92 70.46 0.73 0.18 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 1 0.33 22.49 73.90 1.64 0.41 0.29 1.26 100

MABE 0 0.18 27.59 70.65 0.80 0.20 0.13 0.63 100

MEVE 76 1.90 42.51 53.81 1.58 0.40 0.48 1.23 100

PECO 5 0.36 30.99 66.44 1.17 0.30 0.18 0.91 100

PEFO 3 0.18 28.46 69.86 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.61 100

SAPE 34 0.81 28.26 67.95 1.66 0.42 0.43 1.29 100

WEEL 4 0.33 32.22 63.43 1.95 0.49 0.38 1.52 100

WEMI 16 0.64 31.41 61.73 2.93 0.74 0.94 2.25 100

WHPE 0 0.31 44.36 54.39 0.55 0.14 0.11 0.44 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 8 0.52 48.79 46.47 2.06 0.52 0.56 1.59 100

BAND 6 0.46 47.82 49.15 1.34 0.34 0.30 1.05 100

BLCA 4 0.32 63.28 28.97 3.49 0.88 0.69 2.69 100

CANY 12 0.66 50.99 44.65 1.93 0.49 0.45 1.50 100

CARE 4 0.21 94.84 0.74 1.98 0.50 0.40 1.55 100

GRCA 1 0.21 56.69 41.22 0.92 0.23 0.18 0.75 100

GRSA 0 0.21 91.50 5.13 1.53 0.39 0.25 1.21 100

LAGA 0 0.25 48.48 49.41 0.94 0.24 0.20 0.74 100

MABE 0 0.15 52.52 42.81 2.11 0.53 0.37 1.66 100

MEVE 79 1.67 58.87 36.87 1.82 0.46 0.55 1.42 100

PECO 3 0.30 61.61 32.11 2.85 0.72 0.48 2.23 100

PEFO 0 0.16 45.56 51.39 1.37 0.34 0.23 1.12 100

SAPE 21 0.66 73.70 21.35 2.19 0.55 0.52 1.69 100

WEEL 0 0.26 42.61 52.87 1.97 0.50 0.55 1.51 100

WEMI 10 0.52 62.77 30.83 2.75 0.70 0.84 2.12 100

WHPE 0 0.24 45.74 52.36 0.85 0.21 0.17 0.67 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 113 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.72 30.15 61.20 2.06 1.26 2.13 3.19 100

BAND 15 0.71 23.24 69.03 1.92 1.18 1.63 2.99 100

BLCA 9 0.59 23.67 72.71 0.88 0.54 0.82 1.38 100

CANY 19 0.96 32.66 55.96 2.65 1.63 2.99 4.11 100

CARE 9 0.52 48.88 48.12 0.75 0.46 0.56 1.23 100

GRCA 3 0.26 91.93 1.11 1.76 1.08 1.29 2.83 100

GRSA 3 0.27 49.52 46.33 1.06 0.65 0.76 1.68 100

LAGA 5 0.43 22.09 71.73 1.75 1.07 0.58 2.78 100

MABE 0 0.25 27.57 67.94 1.12 0.69 0.91 1.76 100

MEVE 92 2.14 70.75 6.38 5.19 3.19 6.44 8.05 100

PECO 12 0.58 54.64 39.46 1.53 0.94 0.97 2.45 100

PEFO 1 0.24 88.09 6.50 1.41 0.87 0.86 2.28 100

SAPE 34 0.88 39.44 54.36 1.46 0.90 1.58 2.27 100

WEEL 4 0.38 22.78 73.96 0.83 0.51 0.60 1.31 100

WEMI 15 0.65 30.94 64.97 1.04 0.64 0.76 1.65 100

WHPE 4 0.37 24.02 69.82 1.56 0.96 1.20 2.46 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.66 29.12 65.81 2.19 0.55 0.65 1.68 100

BAND 8 0.61 31.91 64.13 1.75 0.44 0.40 1.36 100

BLCA 7 0.46 33.18 65.04 0.79 0.20 0.18 0.62 100

CANY 14 0.79 32.64 60.84 2.79 0.70 0.88 2.14 100

CARE 4 0.36 91.10 1.19 3.36 0.85 0.90 2.60 100

GRCA 0 0.19 52.76 43.76 1.54 0.39 0.32 1.23 100

GRSA 1 0.21 23.53 72.94 1.57 0.40 0.34 1.22 100

LAGA 3 0.33 21.25 74.88 1.79 0.45 0.16 1.47 100

MABE 0 0.18 22.58 74.94 1.09 0.27 0.27 0.85 100

MEVE 64 1.74 43.30 46.82 4.20 1.06 1.40 3.22 100

PECO 5 0.42 34.27 62.29 1.50 0.38 0.39 1.16 100

PEFO 1 0.17 72.31 23.90 1.69 0.43 0.30 1.36 100

SAPE 18 0.72 27.03 68.03 2.14 0.54 0.62 1.64 100

WEEL 2 0.35 23.08 74.48 1.07 0.27 0.28 0.83 100

WEMI 7 0.50 30.19 67.61 0.97 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

WHPE 2 0.28 90.86 5.64 1.60 0.40 0.26 1.24 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 8 0.54 48.40 45.29 2.72 0.69 0.80 2.09 100

BAND 7 0.46 40.48 55.05 1.96 0.49 0.51 1.51 100

BLCA 1 0.37 52.81 41.55 2.46 0.62 0.66 1.89 100

CANY 11 0.67 66.57 29.91 1.55 0.39 0.32 1.26 100

CARE 2 0.31 63.57 34.10 1.03 0.26 0.22 0.83 100

GRCA 0 0.18 67.04 30.19 1.23 0.31 0.25 0.99 100

GRSA 1 0.16 44.00 53.73 1.06 0.27 0.12 0.83 100

LAGA 0 0.25 54.45 42.75 1.25 0.32 0.23 1.00 100

MABE 0 0.13 52.00 43.74 1.98 0.50 0.24 1.54 100

MEVE 65 1.81 61.69 27.17 4.72 1.19 1.60 3.62 100

PECO 1 0.36 69.51 26.08 1.98 0.50 0.36 1.57 100

PEFO 0 0.16 82.69 13.34 1.78 0.45 0.32 1.43 100

SAPE 13 0.59 46.01 47.86 2.65 0.67 0.77 2.04 100

WEEL 0 0.25 36.12 60.92 1.32 0.33 0.28 1.03 100

WEMI 5 0.40 64.13 26.96 3.80 0.96 1.24 2.92 100

WHPE 1 0.23 72.66 22.60 2.18 0.55 0.30 1.72 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 114 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 1.05 38.73 59.14 0.54 0.33 0.40 0.86 100

BAND 9 0.54 77.25 16.22 1.66 1.02 1.24 2.61 100

BLCA 10 0.58 27.97 66.50 1.39 0.86 1.12 2.16 100

CANY 35 1.47 36.32 61.24 0.61 0.38 0.47 0.99 100

CARE 18 1.11 30.71 66.66 0.64 0.39 0.59 1.01 100

GRCA 7 0.48 31.01 66.45 0.63 0.39 0.51 1.00 100

GRSA 1 0.29 76.95 15.10 2.18 1.34 1.00 3.43 100

LAGA 4 0.40 40.66 56.73 0.68 0.42 0.44 1.09 100

MABE 1 0.24 69.36 25.32 1.36 0.84 0.94 2.18 100

MEVE 97 1.94 55.06 37.27 1.83 1.13 1.84 2.87 100

PECO 6 0.48 32.92 63.69 0.95 0.58 0.38 1.49 100

PEFO 5 0.44 29.28 67.84 0.68 0.42 0.71 1.07 100

SAPE 33 0.89 31.06 63.04 1.43 0.88 1.38 2.22 100

WEEL 6 0.38 38.50 56.07 1.42 0.88 0.88 2.25 100

WEMI 10 0.59 27.20 66.98 1.42 0.88 1.30 2.23 100

WHPE 5 0.37 30.24 67.03 0.72 0.44 0.43 1.14 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 0.88 35.06 63.08 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.66 100

BAND 3 0.38 26.97 70.54 1.12 0.29 0.20 0.87 100

BLCA 4 0.42 25.63 71.10 1.45 0.37 0.33 1.12 100

CANY 29 1.14 32.53 65.94 0.68 0.17 0.15 0.54 100

CARE 13 0.86 26.89 71.54 0.68 0.18 0.18 0.54 100

GRCA 5 0.36 27.72 70.68 0.70 0.18 0.16 0.55 100

GRSA 0 0.21 36.09 57.39 2.96 0.76 0.50 2.30 100

LAGA 1 0.28 36.17 62.10 0.77 0.20 0.14 0.61 100

MABE 0 0.20 33.07 64.29 1.19 0.31 0.21 0.94 100

MEVE 64 1.55 71.87 17.66 4.45 1.15 1.45 3.43 100

PECO 2 0.34 87.02 9.05 1.73 0.45 0.41 1.35 100

PEFO 2 0.29 85.93 11.66 1.07 0.28 0.21 0.85 100

SAPE 18 0.69 27.73 68.93 1.46 0.38 0.39 1.12 100

WEEL 4 0.30 33.81 63.19 1.36 0.35 0.23 1.07 100

WEMI 6 0.43 21.27 75.64 1.32 0.34 0.40 1.03 100

WHPE 2 0.28 27.76 70.47 0.80 0.21 0.13 0.63 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 16 0.74 47.58 49.03 1.50 0.39 0.27 1.23 100

BAND 1 0.31 90.32 5.28 1.94 0.50 0.44 1.52 100

BLCA 2 0.33 43.60 52.09 1.91 0.49 0.44 1.47 100

CANY 26 0.97 57.52 39.83 1.12 0.29 0.37 0.87 100

CARE 11 0.64 43.16 54.68 0.94 0.24 0.24 0.74 100

GRCA 4 0.25 48.96 48.68 1.04 0.27 0.22 0.84 100

GRSA 0 0.19 85.17 9.13 2.62 0.67 0.36 2.05 100

LAGA 0 0.25 49.53 46.69 1.70 0.44 0.32 1.32 100

MABE 0 0.15 79.85 16.16 1.77 0.46 0.35 1.41 100

MEVE 59 1.58 68.52 25.71 2.48 0.64 0.73 1.92 100

PECO 2 0.27 59.52 37.02 1.57 0.40 0.28 1.22 100

PEFO 2 0.25 90.57 6.00 1.50 0.39 0.36 1.18 100

SAPE 10 0.54 44.45 51.26 1.87 0.48 0.50 1.44 100

WEEL 0 0.23 47.89 50.42 0.76 0.20 0.13 0.60 100

WEMI 2 0.35 55.25 38.42 2.75 0.71 0.75 2.12 100

WHPE 2 0.23 84.13 10.39 2.46 0.63 0.47 1.92 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 115 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 15 0.84 33.46 63.61 0.73 0.45 0.58 1.17 100

BAND 20 0.81 53.16 38.54 2.16 1.33 1.41 3.39 100

BLCA 10 0.54 22.21 73.48 1.04 0.64 1.01 1.62 100

CANY 22 1.06 24.09 71.18 1.10 0.68 1.23 1.72 100

CARE 5 0.38 35.19 62.28 0.64 0.39 0.47 1.04 100

GRCA 3 0.34 47.06 50.82 0.54 0.33 0.35 0.90 100

GRSA 2 0.34 83.04 12.72 1.10 0.68 0.71 1.74 100

LAGA 4 0.45 81.97 13.16 1.28 0.79 0.74 2.05 100

MABE 0 0.25 28.95 63.55 2.07 1.28 0.79 3.36 100

MEVE 96 2.18 51.65 41.36 1.63 1.00 1.80 2.56 100

PECO 8 0.52 44.34 53.57 0.54 0.33 0.36 0.86 100

PEFO 5 0.27 91.57 1.90 1.66 1.02 1.20 2.65 100

SAPE 43 1.04 34.95 58.17 1.67 1.03 1.57 2.61 100

WEEL 5 0.43 35.21 57.78 1.81 1.12 1.23 2.86 100

WEMI 25 0.81 32.08 65.59 0.56 0.35 0.53 0.90 100

WHPE 4 0.41 34.54 59.79 1.49 0.92 0.93 2.35 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 12 0.65 29.14 67.09 1.64 0.42 0.45 1.27 100

BAND 10 0.56 52.56 41.80 2.54 0.65 0.47 1.98 100

BLCA 4 0.42 20.20 77.31 1.08 0.28 0.30 0.83 100

CANY 17 0.85 30.88 67.04 0.92 0.24 0.20 0.73 100

CARE 5 0.26 91.06 1.83 3.12 0.81 0.70 2.47 100

GRCA 3 0.24 42.57 56.03 0.62 0.16 0.12 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.23 28.00 70.38 0.73 0.19 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 1 0.32 22.47 73.91 1.64 0.42 0.29 1.27 100

MABE 0 0.19 28.63 66.47 2.26 0.58 0.24 1.82 100

MEVE 75 1.89 42.10 54.26 1.56 0.40 0.47 1.22 100

PECO 5 0.35 30.81 66.63 1.17 0.30 0.18 0.91 100

PEFO 3 0.18 28.47 69.84 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.61 100

SAPE 34 0.80 28.16 68.06 1.65 0.42 0.42 1.29 100

WEEL 4 0.33 24.93 71.68 1.47 0.38 0.41 1.13 100

WEMI 13 0.63 31.35 61.78 2.92 0.75 0.93 2.26 100

WHPE 0 0.30 44.20 54.55 0.55 0.14 0.11 0.44 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 8 0.52 48.71 46.55 2.06 0.53 0.56 1.59 100

BAND 6 0.45 47.81 49.17 1.33 0.34 0.30 1.05 100

BLCA 4 0.30 36.30 60.23 1.50 0.39 0.42 1.16 100

CANY 11 0.65 47.45 49.79 1.21 0.31 0.27 0.96 100

CARE 4 0.21 94.83 0.74 1.97 0.51 0.40 1.55 100

GRCA 1 0.20 56.66 41.24 0.92 0.24 0.18 0.75 100

GRSA 0 0.20 91.48 5.14 1.53 0.39 0.25 1.21 100

LAGA 0 0.25 48.51 49.37 0.93 0.24 0.20 0.74 100

MABE 0 0.15 48.97 44.95 2.80 0.72 0.30 2.25 100

MEVE 76 1.66 58.38 37.40 1.80 0.46 0.54 1.41 100

PECO 3 0.30 61.69 32.01 2.85 0.73 0.48 2.23 100

PEFO 0 0.16 45.42 51.53 1.36 0.35 0.22 1.12 100

SAPE 21 0.66 73.19 21.88 2.18 0.56 0.51 1.68 100

WEEL 0 0.25 42.60 52.88 1.96 0.51 0.54 1.51 100

WEMI 9 0.51 43.26 52.99 1.61 0.42 0.47 1.25 100

WHPE 0 0.23 45.83 52.26 0.85 0.22 0.17 0.68 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 116 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.74 30.46 60.93 2.04 1.26 2.14 3.18 100

BAND 15 0.71 23.48 68.94 1.88 1.16 1.60 2.93 100

BLCA 9 0.59 37.08 55.34 1.83 1.13 1.78 2.84 100

CANY 20 0.97 32.92 55.93 2.59 1.60 2.93 4.03 100

CARE 9 0.53 49.90 47.20 0.72 0.45 0.54 1.19 100

GRCA 3 0.27 92.31 1.07 1.68 1.03 1.22 2.69 100

GRSA 3 0.27 24.99 69.23 1.46 0.90 1.12 2.30 100

LAGA 5 0.43 22.20 71.74 1.71 1.06 0.56 2.72 100

MABE 0 0.24 24.98 71.07 0.97 0.60 0.87 1.52 100

MEVE 93 2.15 71.14 6.46 5.08 3.13 6.31 7.88 100

PECO 12 0.59 55.50 38.80 1.48 0.91 0.94 2.37 100

PEFO 1 0.25 88.57 6.28 1.34 0.83 0.81 2.17 100

SAPE 35 0.88 28.38 62.72 2.09 1.29 2.27 3.25 100

WEEL 5 0.39 23.21 73.59 0.82 0.50 0.58 1.29 100

WEMI 15 0.65 31.61 64.42 1.01 0.63 0.73 1.61 100

WHPE 4 0.38 24.18 69.77 1.52 0.94 1.18 2.41 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.63 28.93 66.06 2.16 0.56 0.63 1.67 100

BAND 8 0.60 23.30 73.35 1.46 0.38 0.38 1.13 100

BLCA 7 0.44 33.38 64.83 0.79 0.20 0.18 0.62 100

CANY 13 0.78 32.54 60.94 2.78 0.72 0.88 2.14 100

CARE 4 0.35 91.08 1.19 3.35 0.86 0.90 2.61 100

GRCA 0 0.18 52.85 43.67 1.54 0.40 0.32 1.23 100

GRSA 1 0.21 23.53 72.93 1.57 0.41 0.34 1.23 100

LAGA 3 0.32 21.23 74.90 1.79 0.46 0.16 1.47 100

MABE 0 0.18 22.92 75.41 0.73 0.19 0.18 0.57 100

MEVE 63 1.73 44.56 45.24 4.32 1.11 1.44 3.33 100

PECO 5 0.41 52.81 43.33 1.73 0.45 0.31 1.38 100

PEFO 1 0.17 31.86 65.63 1.13 0.29 0.18 0.92 100

SAPE 17 0.69 26.79 68.32 2.10 0.54 0.62 1.62 100

WEEL 1 0.33 23.22 75.05 0.76 0.19 0.19 0.59 100

WEMI 6 0.49 30.25 67.54 0.97 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

WHPE 2 0.28 90.85 5.63 1.59 0.41 0.26 1.24 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 8 0.51 48.29 45.45 2.70 0.69 0.79 2.08 100

BAND 7 0.46 40.43 55.09 1.96 0.50 0.51 1.51 100

BLCA 1 0.36 52.90 41.47 2.45 0.63 0.65 1.89 100

CANY 11 0.66 66.40 30.09 1.54 0.40 0.32 1.25 100

CARE 2 0.31 63.58 34.08 1.02 0.26 0.22 0.83 100

GRCA 0 0.18 67.10 30.12 1.22 0.32 0.25 0.99 100

GRSA 1 0.15 43.95 53.77 1.05 0.27 0.12 0.83 100

LAGA 0 0.24 39.47 55.29 2.42 0.62 0.21 1.98 100

MABE 0 0.13 38.24 59.35 1.05 0.27 0.26 0.83 100

MEVE 65 1.79 61.65 27.20 4.71 1.21 1.59 3.63 100

PECO 1 0.36 69.63 25.96 1.97 0.51 0.36 1.57 100

PEFO 0 0.16 82.67 13.34 1.77 0.46 0.32 1.43 100

SAPE 12 0.58 45.91 47.97 2.64 0.68 0.77 2.03 100

WEEL 0 0.24 38.69 58.81 1.09 0.28 0.27 0.86 100

WEMI 4 0.40 63.80 27.31 3.77 0.97 1.23 2.91 100

WHPE 0 0.23 49.63 48.31 0.91 0.23 0.19 0.72 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 117 of 148 

SCR with Inherent SO3 Removal and Sorbent Injection 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 118 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 59 1.92 71.14 23.07 1.46 0.89 1.08 2.36 100

BAND 70 1.31 35.48 59.51 1.32 0.81 0.83 2.06 100

BLCA 40 1.14 52.26 45.03 0.71 0.44 0.43 1.13 100

CANY 80 2.59 65.05 28.99 1.51 0.92 1.08 2.44 100

CARE 31 1.97 51.54 43.71 1.15 0.71 1.06 1.83 100

GRCA 14 1.14 42.20 54.25 0.90 0.55 0.65 1.45 100

GRSA 23 0.85 77.31 14.03 2.38 1.46 1.09 3.75 100

LAGA 35 1.15 42.48 54.54 0.77 0.47 0.50 1.24 100

MABE 16 0.67 41.50 54.30 1.08 0.66 0.76 1.70 100

MEVE 184 4.20 84.29 1.94 3.21 1.97 3.57 5.03 100

PECO 53 1.40 43.19 52.60 1.08 0.66 0.76 1.71 100

PEFO 18 1.13 84.94 9.80 1.30 0.79 1.11 2.06 100

SAPE 111 1.78 79.88 8.73 2.70 1.65 2.83 4.20 100

WEEL 34 0.99 40.76 54.57 1.20 0.73 0.85 1.89 100

WEMI 74 1.51 26.70 66.76 1.53 0.94 1.66 2.40 100

WHPE 37 1.00 32.06 63.10 1.28 0.78 0.76 2.02 100

Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 47 1.69 33.57 62.13 1.88 0.48 0.48 1.46 100

BAND 49 1.04 30.40 66.83 1.26 0.32 0.23 0.97 100

BLCA 26 0.95 37.13 57.66 2.28 0.58 0.58 1.76 100

CANY 67 2.26 55.66 38.57 2.53 0.65 0.62 1.98 100

CARE 28 1.81 52.95 42.68 1.91 0.49 0.48 1.49 100

GRCA 12 0.97 38.14 59.75 0.93 0.24 0.19 0.75 100

GRSA 14 0.63 38.82 54.18 3.18 0.81 0.53 2.47 100

LAGA 20 0.86 38.38 59.80 0.81 0.21 0.15 0.65 100

MABE 10 0.54 69.46 25.41 2.29 0.59 0.43 1.83 100

MEVE 157 3.38 75.39 9.84 6.26 1.60 2.09 4.82 100

PECO 35 1.05 80.51 15.41 1.83 0.47 0.36 1.43 100

PEFO 14 0.82 27.95 69.41 1.18 0.30 0.25 0.92 100

SAPE 93 1.40 39.89 53.93 2.71 0.69 0.68 2.09 100

WEEL 19 0.80 37.76 60.62 0.70 0.18 0.19 0.55 100

WEMI 53 1.15 28.74 65.59 2.44 0.62 0.72 1.88 100

WHPE 27 0.75 30.82 66.18 1.36 0.35 0.23 1.06 100

SCR with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 25 1.10 78.65 16.40 2.18 0.56 0.46 1.75 100

BAND 13 0.59 90.30 3.25 2.86 0.73 0.64 2.23 100

BLCA 9 0.54 46.88 43.93 4.03 1.03 1.03 3.11 100

CANY 47 1.59 92.64 1.94 2.31 0.59 0.73 1.79 100

CARE 20 1.08 74.52 17.89 3.32 0.85 0.83 2.58 100

GRCA 9 0.53 95.98 0.43 1.60 0.41 0.34 1.26 100

GRSA 2 0.40 89.74 4.73 2.43 0.62 0.59 1.89 100

LAGA 5 0.41 65.61 26.72 3.46 0.88 0.64 2.69 100

MABE 1 0.27 84.40 11.12 1.99 0.51 0.43 1.55 100

MEVE 112 2.28 75.83 9.46 6.23 1.59 2.10 4.79 100

PECO 11 0.57 92.83 2.51 2.08 0.53 0.42 1.63 100

PEFO 7 0.48 65.17 31.69 1.40 0.36 0.27 1.12 100

SAPE 45 1.04 77.34 14.22 3.64 0.93 1.05 2.81 100

WEEL 4 0.43 85.61 8.11 2.78 0.71 0.57 2.21 100

WEMI 15 0.57 44.26 46.92 3.76 0.96 1.21 2.89 100

WHPE 7 0.50 65.57 29.04 2.42 0.62 0.46 1.88 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 119 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 46 1.76 43.87 46.41 2.37 1.45 2.20 3.70 100

BAND 87 1.86 44.28 49.89 1.45 0.89 1.18 2.31 100

BLCA 54 1.34 35.37 59.23 1.36 0.83 1.04 2.17 100

CANY 67 2.04 83.50 1.79 3.67 2.25 3.05 5.74 100

CARE 24 1.16 33.88 63.47 0.67 0.41 0.49 1.09 100

GRCA 15 0.93 89.85 2.03 2.09 1.28 1.45 3.30 100

GRSA 28 1.00 82.39 12.99 1.20 0.73 0.78 1.90 100

LAGA 63 1.30 81.37 13.32 1.40 0.86 0.81 2.24 100

MABE 20 0.78 28.96 63.27 2.15 1.32 0.80 3.49 100

MEVE 184 4.09 34.40 60.73 1.18 0.72 1.11 1.87 100

PECO 62 1.33 53.02 40.33 1.81 1.11 0.89 2.85 100

PEFO 16 0.79 90.95 1.94 1.81 1.11 1.31 2.89 100

SAPE 125 2.37 71.74 23.38 1.23 0.75 0.94 1.96 100

WEEL 43 1.15 35.15 60.78 1.03 0.63 0.76 1.65 100

WEMI 117 1.85 57.89 29.83 2.89 1.77 3.13 4.49 100

WHPE 40 0.95 55.69 38.20 1.67 1.02 0.74 2.67 100

Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 32 1.65 49.70 47.38 1.28 0.33 0.30 1.01 100

BAND 61 1.56 37.39 59.91 1.19 0.30 0.27 0.93 100

BLCA 30 1.15 31.11 65.99 1.28 0.33 0.28 1.02 100

CANY 57 1.73 52.51 43.96 1.55 0.40 0.35 1.23 100

CARE 18 0.82 91.30 1.66 3.11 0.79 0.69 2.46 100

GRCA 10 0.76 44.30 54.26 0.64 0.16 0.12 0.52 100

GRSA 17 0.71 28.48 69.87 0.74 0.19 0.13 0.60 100

LAGA 40 0.94 26.32 71.29 1.07 0.27 0.22 0.84 100

MABE 11 0.56 84.39 12.71 1.31 0.33 0.23 1.03 100

MEVE 162 3.53 85.08 5.44 4.14 1.06 1.04 3.24 100

PECO 41 1.09 41.87 56.64 0.66 0.17 0.13 0.53 100

PEFO 9 0.60 28.65 69.64 0.76 0.19 0.13 0.62 100

SAPE 109 2.01 46.15 47.36 2.82 0.72 0.76 2.19 100

WEEL 24 0.91 30.66 67.44 0.86 0.22 0.14 0.68 100

WEMI 83 1.48 57.20 35.77 3.02 0.77 0.91 2.32 100

WHPE 20 0.86 47.51 47.27 2.35 0.60 0.43 1.84 100

SCR with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 21 0.86 51.02 38.58 4.52 1.16 1.22 3.50 100

BAND 26 0.80 61.90 32.66 2.40 0.61 0.55 1.88 100

BLCA 11 0.55 66.71 27.63 2.51 0.64 0.53 1.97 100

CANY 35 1.19 64.71 30.00 2.33 0.59 0.52 1.84 100

CARE 10 0.58 94.55 0.30 2.30 0.59 0.46 1.80 100

GRCA 4 0.46 53.96 41.17 2.13 0.54 0.54 1.65 100

GRSA 3 0.33 41.55 49.63 4.06 1.04 0.42 3.31 100

LAGA 5 0.42 49.05 43.05 3.42 0.87 0.97 2.64 100

MABE 0 0.28 49.17 42.71 3.55 0.91 0.93 2.74 100

MEVE 126 2.46 67.76 24.75 3.19 0.81 1.02 2.47 100

PECO 12 0.56 47.42 43.53 4.19 1.07 0.57 3.22 100

PEFO 5 0.41 94.78 0.79 1.98 0.51 0.35 1.59 100

SAPE 54 1.13 59.78 29.13 4.83 1.23 1.27 3.74 100

WEEL 5 0.41 62.24 32.18 2.47 0.63 0.52 1.95 100

WEMI 29 0.90 49.98 28.12 9.51 2.43 2.55 7.40 100

WHPE 5 0.44 58.68 38.14 1.44 0.37 0.23 1.14 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 120 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 39 1.82 38.16 50.64 2.67 1.63 2.75 4.15 100

BAND 77 1.51 40.84 49.83 2.33 1.43 1.94 3.63 100

BLCA 30 1.40 29.26 67.79 0.76 0.46 0.52 1.21 100

CANY 57 2.00 64.92 31.30 0.94 0.58 0.72 1.53 100

CARE 25 1.34 43.68 49.81 1.57 0.96 1.51 2.47 100

GRCA 11 0.81 91.83 0.94 1.83 1.12 1.34 2.94 100

GRSA 26 0.82 50.03 45.62 1.12 0.68 0.79 1.76 100

LAGA 40 1.14 25.27 67.60 2.02 1.24 0.66 3.22 100

MABE 15 0.63 36.60 57.88 1.53 0.94 0.65 2.41 100

MEVE 174 4.85 69.32 17.06 3.27 2.00 3.22 5.14 100

PECO 63 1.26 49.00 43.40 1.87 1.15 1.66 2.93 100

PEFO 17 0.74 88.02 6.36 1.46 0.90 0.89 2.36 100

SAPE 127 1.96 80.84 9.41 2.36 1.45 2.22 3.73 100

WEEL 31 0.94 25.57 71.56 0.70 0.43 0.61 1.12 100

WEMI 87 1.69 40.63 54.52 1.17 0.72 1.13 1.84 100

WHPE 48 1.05 48.42 48.68 0.78 0.48 0.39 1.25 100

Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 27 1.49 30.95 67.01 0.89 0.23 0.21 0.71 100

BAND 57 1.20 77.97 17.21 2.11 0.54 0.52 1.65 100

BLCA 21 1.07 27.98 70.17 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.65 100

CANY 48 1.68 70.45 24.81 2.07 0.53 0.49 1.65 100

CARE 23 1.05 52.60 45.24 0.94 0.24 0.20 0.77 100

GRCA 9 0.57 93.89 1.17 2.19 0.56 0.46 1.74 100

GRSA 15 0.64 27.42 70.94 0.76 0.19 0.09 0.60 100

LAGA 28 0.90 23.76 71.98 1.99 0.51 0.18 1.58 100

MABE 8 0.51 27.63 69.59 1.22 0.31 0.28 0.97 100

MEVE 159 3.80 41.19 53.18 2.41 0.62 0.72 1.88 100

PECO 50 1.00 51.25 46.75 0.89 0.23 0.18 0.70 100

PEFO 9 0.53 32.43 65.01 1.15 0.29 0.18 0.93 100

SAPE 97 1.56 37.04 56.49 2.78 0.71 0.83 2.15 100

WEEL 22 0.83 28.10 67.91 1.74 0.44 0.44 1.36 100

WEMI 63 1.34 36.23 61.45 1.00 0.26 0.29 0.77 100

WHPE 27 0.89 91.09 5.38 1.60 0.41 0.26 1.25 100

SCR with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 19 0.93 74.71 16.18 4.02 1.03 0.79 3.27 100

BAND 23 0.77 93.76 1.63 2.09 0.53 0.36 1.63 100

BLCA 9 0.63 52.82 40.24 3.02 0.77 0.78 2.37 100

CANY 33 1.17 75.89 15.94 3.50 0.90 1.06 2.70 100

CARE 14 0.69 56.97 36.41 2.88 0.73 0.79 2.23 100

GRCA 6 0.39 79.60 16.20 1.85 0.47 0.38 1.49 100

GRSA 3 0.33 49.16 44.91 2.58 0.66 0.70 1.99 100

LAGA 5 0.45 49.90 42.48 3.38 0.86 0.75 2.62 100

MABE 0 0.23 69.19 26.94 1.71 0.44 0.37 1.36 100

MEVE 120 2.39 49.81 40.04 4.35 1.11 1.31 3.38 100

PECO 18 0.66 64.03 26.57 4.16 1.06 0.92 3.25 100

PEFO 5 0.41 94.32 2.22 1.53 0.39 0.33 1.21 100

SAPE 50 1.09 61.43 28.83 4.26 1.09 1.08 3.31 100

WEEL 5 0.40 68.11 27.37 2.02 0.52 0.40 1.59 100

WEMI 17 0.65 62.17 32.25 2.46 0.63 0.52 1.97 100

WHPE 6 0.46 79.19 13.31 3.44 0.88 0.47 2.72 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 121 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 16 0.82 25.92 68.87 1.30 0.79 1.06 2.06 100

BAND 1 0.31 41.96 53.16 1.24 0.75 0.94 1.95 100

BLCA 2 0.35 31.77 66.43 0.47 0.29 0.29 0.75 100

CANY 28 1.10 43.62 52.48 0.91 0.55 1.03 1.41 100

CARE 12 0.76 26.38 71.01 0.64 0.38 0.58 1.01 100

GRCA 5 0.31 31.06 66.09 0.72 0.44 0.52 1.17 100

GRSA 0 0.18 87.77 6.73 1.38 0.83 1.12 2.17 100

LAGA 1 0.26 36.35 60.88 0.72 0.44 0.46 1.16 100

MABE 0 0.18 23.69 72.07 1.08 0.65 0.82 1.69 100

MEVE 55 1.51 47.09 35.97 3.88 2.35 4.67 6.04 100

PECO 2 0.29 24.39 68.71 1.72 1.04 1.48 2.67 100

PEFO 2 0.25 84.76 11.37 0.99 0.60 0.69 1.59 100

SAPE 10 0.61 26.56 68.07 1.32 0.80 1.20 2.05 100

WEEL 2 0.27 31.55 66.50 0.52 0.31 0.29 0.82 100

WEMI 3 0.37 22.71 69.34 1.89 1.14 1.99 2.93 100

WHPE 2 0.24 27.68 69.49 0.76 0.46 0.42 1.20 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.69 25.34 71.69 1.31 0.33 0.31 1.03 100

BAND 1 0.24 43.57 53.42 1.34 0.34 0.29 1.04 100

BLCA 2 0.29 23.45 74.26 0.99 0.25 0.26 0.78 100

CANY 22 1.00 38.19 59.52 1.01 0.26 0.23 0.80 100

CARE 11 0.57 26.93 71.52 0.67 0.17 0.17 0.53 100

GRCA 4 0.27 30.85 67.43 0.76 0.19 0.15 0.61 100

GRSA 0 0.14 21.45 76.75 0.80 0.20 0.17 0.63 100

LAGA 0 0.19 28.88 69.14 0.89 0.23 0.16 0.70 100

MABE 0 0.14 20.45 75.64 1.73 0.44 0.40 1.34 100

MEVE 38 1.35 35.69 59.62 2.00 0.51 0.63 1.55 100

PECO 1 0.23 25.62 70.23 1.82 0.47 0.44 1.41 100

PEFO 2 0.19 25.42 72.19 1.06 0.27 0.23 0.84 100

SAPE 7 0.44 27.36 69.47 1.39 0.36 0.35 1.08 100

WEEL 0 0.22 33.65 63.73 1.17 0.30 0.22 0.93 100

WEMI 2 0.31 30.63 61.38 3.48 0.89 0.91 2.70 100

WHPE 2 0.19 28.38 69.83 0.81 0.21 0.13 0.64 100

SCR with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 2 0.28 47.73 44.36 3.42 0.87 0.95 2.67 100

BAND 0 0.12 49.46 43.72 3.00 0.77 0.71 2.34 100

BLCA 0 0.11 43.66 48.23 3.58 0.92 0.82 2.80 100

CANY 4 0.48 66.19 29.95 1.71 0.44 0.37 1.36 100

CARE 2 0.24 56.65 41.23 0.94 0.24 0.17 0.77 100

GRCA 0 0.11 61.55 34.37 1.80 0.46 0.36 1.46 100

GRSA 0 0.08 90.15 4.37 2.40 0.61 0.59 1.87 100

LAGA 0 0.08 45.61 46.29 3.51 0.90 0.98 2.72 100

MABE 0 0.05 84.37 11.11 2.01 0.51 0.44 1.57 100

MEVE 14 0.68 61.20 26.45 5.22 1.33 1.77 4.03 100

PECO 0 0.11 48.79 44.90 2.89 0.74 0.44 2.24 100

PEFO 1 0.09 64.47 32.40 1.39 0.36 0.26 1.13 100

SAPE 0 0.22 43.81 46.07 4.46 1.14 1.07 3.45 100

WEEL 0 0.09 43.22 48.64 3.60 0.92 0.79 2.83 100

WEMI 0 0.12 46.55 44.95 3.61 0.92 1.18 2.79 100

WHPE 0 0.10 81.91 11.01 3.15 0.81 0.66 2.46 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 122 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 11 0.68 24.06 72.39 0.91 0.55 0.63 1.46 100

BAND 7 0.49 50.26 40.84 2.33 1.41 1.50 3.66 100

BLCA 4 0.37 19.24 76.63 0.99 0.60 0.99 1.55 100

CANY 16 0.84 30.14 66.46 0.85 0.51 0.67 1.36 100

CARE 4 0.23 29.36 68.45 0.54 0.33 0.45 0.87 100

GRCA 1 0.21 42.87 54.86 0.58 0.35 0.37 0.97 100

GRSA 0 0.20 27.46 69.95 0.68 0.41 0.39 1.10 100

LAGA 0 0.28 23.68 72.69 0.93 0.56 0.66 1.48 100

MABE 0 0.16 27.20 65.28 2.09 1.27 0.76 3.40 100

MEVE 73 1.79 37.50 56.98 1.29 0.78 1.40 2.05 100

PECO 3 0.31 38.08 53.60 2.22 1.34 1.25 3.51 100

PEFO 2 0.16 28.11 69.15 0.71 0.43 0.44 1.17 100

SAPE 27 0.73 26.46 67.64 1.45 0.88 1.29 2.29 100

WEEL 1 0.28 23.98 70.42 1.36 0.82 1.31 2.11 100

WEMI 9 0.54 43.96 46.81 2.18 1.32 2.34 3.39 100

WHPE 0 0.25 30.07 67.71 0.57 0.35 0.39 0.92 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.54 23.97 72.89 1.37 0.35 0.35 1.07 100

BAND 4 0.40 31.04 66.80 0.95 0.24 0.22 0.75 100

BLCA 1 0.29 25.16 72.63 0.98 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

CANY 13 0.65 23.43 73.82 1.20 0.31 0.31 0.94 100

CARE 3 0.18 31.45 66.94 0.71 0.18 0.15 0.57 100

GRCA 1 0.16 43.73 54.87 0.62 0.16 0.11 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.14 27.52 70.87 0.72 0.19 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 0 0.21 25.77 71.45 1.20 0.31 0.33 0.94 100

MABE 0 0.12 26.89 71.16 0.87 0.22 0.16 0.69 100

MEVE 52 1.40 60.18 31.05 3.70 0.95 1.26 2.86 100

PECO 3 0.24 40.91 57.63 0.65 0.17 0.13 0.52 100

PEFO 0 0.13 28.41 69.90 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.62 100

SAPE 16 0.59 26.83 69.85 1.45 0.37 0.35 1.14 100

WEEL 0 0.20 24.64 72.13 1.40 0.36 0.38 1.09 100

WEMI 6 0.43 24.32 73.64 0.90 0.23 0.19 0.72 100

WHPE 0 0.17 31.55 67.09 0.60 0.15 0.12 0.49 100

SCR with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 1 0.22 48.02 42.23 4.24 1.08 1.13 3.31 100

BAND 1 0.19 68.96 27.51 1.55 0.40 0.37 1.22 100

BLCA 0 0.11 59.71 36.13 1.88 0.48 0.30 1.50 100

CANY 2 0.25 87.37 0.80 5.23 1.34 1.18 4.08 100

CARE 0 0.12 94.53 0.32 2.29 0.59 0.46 1.81 100

GRCA 0 0.10 71.19 25.16 1.61 0.41 0.30 1.33 100

GRSA 0 0.07 40.62 50.77 3.96 1.01 0.41 3.23 100

LAGA 0 0.08 44.82 48.06 3.14 0.80 0.73 2.44 100

MABE 0 0.05 48.36 43.82 3.42 0.88 0.88 2.65 100

MEVE 18 0.73 58.06 30.43 4.86 1.24 1.64 3.76 100

PECO 0 0.12 70.34 23.18 2.87 0.73 0.61 2.27 100

PEFO 0 0.08 94.76 0.81 1.98 0.51 0.35 1.59 100

SAPE 4 0.30 71.74 21.07 3.18 0.81 0.73 2.47 100

WEEL 0 0.09 61.22 33.28 2.43 0.62 0.51 1.93 100

WEMI 0 0.21 45.94 34.37 8.55 2.19 2.27 6.69 100

WHPE 0 0.09 77.40 15.50 3.25 0.83 0.43 2.58 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 123 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.60 28.75 65.62 1.35 0.81 1.33 2.14 100

BAND 8 0.54 22.07 72.47 1.34 0.81 1.23 2.09 100

BLCA 2 0.38 34.19 62.97 0.72 0.43 0.54 1.15 100

CANY 14 0.71 29.97 59.10 2.54 1.54 2.91 3.94 100

CARE 3 0.32 86.40 1.13 3.02 1.83 2.88 4.74 100

GRCA 0 0.16 51.56 42.85 1.42 0.86 1.00 2.30 100

GRSA 1 0.17 19.79 77.41 0.69 0.42 0.59 1.10 100

LAGA 2 0.29 36.29 60.25 0.89 0.54 0.59 1.44 100

MABE 0 0.16 31.87 65.36 0.70 0.42 0.53 1.12 100

MEVE 60 1.67 38.31 45.74 3.66 2.22 4.38 5.69 100

PECO 3 0.35 51.53 42.28 1.61 0.98 1.01 2.59 100

PEFO 0 0.14 31.20 64.81 1.05 0.64 0.58 1.73 100

SAPE 13 0.63 34.16 60.15 1.34 0.81 1.43 2.10 100

WEEL 0 0.25 23.83 70.37 1.42 0.86 1.27 2.25 100

WEMI 4 0.45 21.90 69.56 2.19 1.33 1.52 3.49 100

WHPE 1 0.26 22.07 72.11 1.47 0.89 1.11 2.34 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.52 29.53 67.07 1.47 0.38 0.40 1.16 100

BAND 3 0.37 23.82 72.96 1.41 0.36 0.36 1.10 100

BLCA 0 0.28 25.40 72.77 0.80 0.20 0.19 0.64 100

CANY 12 0.57 38.31 60.22 0.65 0.17 0.14 0.52 100

CARE 2 0.23 31.26 65.22 1.53 0.39 0.39 1.20 100

GRCA 0 0.12 52.37 44.18 1.52 0.39 0.31 1.22 100

GRSA 1 0.14 27.01 70.46 1.12 0.29 0.22 0.89 100

LAGA 0 0.21 20.74 75.52 1.71 0.44 0.17 1.41 100

MABE 0 0.11 33.14 63.55 1.53 0.39 0.19 1.20 100

MEVE 48 1.27 41.93 48.61 4.01 1.03 1.33 3.10 100

PECO 1 0.27 46.70 51.27 0.91 0.23 0.15 0.73 100

PEFO 0 0.11 31.59 65.92 1.12 0.29 0.18 0.91 100

SAPE 7 0.50 26.74 68.42 2.08 0.53 0.62 1.61 100

WEEL 0 0.20 20.88 76.49 1.15 0.30 0.29 0.90 100

WEMI 3 0.35 45.71 42.80 4.96 1.27 1.43 3.84 100

WHPE 0 0.20 22.74 73.74 1.56 0.40 0.34 1.23 100

SCR with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 0 0.25 57.19 35.83 3.08 0.79 0.60 2.51 100

BAND 0 0.17 94.07 0.41 2.45 0.63 0.52 1.92 100

BLCA 0 0.13 66.53 25.59 3.41 0.87 0.92 2.67 100

CANY 3 0.30 71.12 22.78 2.66 0.68 0.63 2.13 100

CARE 0 0.15 90.48 0.23 4.00 1.02 1.13 3.14 100

GRCA 0 0.08 87.80 5.90 2.77 0.71 0.61 2.21 100

GRSA 0 0.07 76.13 18.82 2.24 0.57 0.47 1.77 100

LAGA 0 0.09 40.72 44.22 6.84 1.75 1.02 5.46 100

MABE 0 0.05 65.75 30.57 1.61 0.41 0.37 1.29 100

MEVE 15 0.61 57.86 17.99 10.26 2.63 3.34 7.92 100

PECO 0 0.15 78.33 14.77 3.08 0.79 0.57 2.46 100

PEFO 0 0.08 94.29 2.26 1.52 0.39 0.33 1.21 100

SAPE 0 0.23 58.64 32.64 3.83 0.98 0.93 2.99 100

WEEL 0 0.09 76.06 19.52 1.93 0.49 0.48 1.51 100

WEMI 0 0.13 47.70 27.45 10.56 2.70 3.44 8.16 100

WHPE 0 0.10 67.97 28.76 1.44 0.37 0.30 1.15 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 124 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 16 0.83 25.00 69.90 1.28 0.78 1.04 2.02 100

BAND 1 0.32 25.12 71.09 1.01 0.61 0.61 1.57 100

BLCA 3 0.36 23.37 71.60 1.28 0.78 0.99 1.98 100

CANY 27 1.07 40.57 55.69 0.86 0.53 1.00 1.35 100

CARE 12 0.78 25.24 72.22 0.62 0.38 0.56 0.99 100

GRCA 5 0.31 29.84 67.36 0.71 0.43 0.51 1.15 100

GRSA 0 0.19 32.82 57.23 2.66 1.62 1.52 4.16 100

LAGA 0 0.26 34.98 62.29 0.71 0.43 0.46 1.14 100

MABE 0 0.18 19.11 76.53 1.10 0.67 0.86 1.73 100

MEVE 56 1.49 45.92 37.44 3.81 2.32 4.60 5.92 100

PECO 2 0.29 84.16 9.33 1.63 0.99 1.33 2.56 100

PEFO 2 0.25 23.63 72.55 0.97 0.59 0.72 1.54 100

SAPE 11 0.63 25.41 69.31 1.29 0.79 1.19 2.01 100

WEEL 1 0.27 30.10 67.99 0.51 0.31 0.29 0.80 100

WEMI 3 0.38 31.78 59.74 2.05 1.25 1.98 3.19 100

WHPE 2 0.24 26.23 70.99 0.74 0.45 0.42 1.17 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.69 25.31 71.71 1.31 0.34 0.31 1.02 100

BAND 1 0.23 43.57 53.42 1.34 0.34 0.29 1.03 100

BLCA 2 0.28 23.45 74.26 1.00 0.26 0.26 0.77 100

CANY 22 0.99 38.13 59.58 1.01 0.26 0.23 0.80 100

CARE 10 0.57 26.92 71.52 0.68 0.17 0.17 0.53 100

GRCA 4 0.27 30.84 67.43 0.76 0.20 0.15 0.61 100

GRSA 0 0.14 21.45 76.75 0.80 0.21 0.17 0.62 100

LAGA 0 0.19 28.87 69.14 0.89 0.23 0.16 0.70 100

MABE 0 0.14 20.45 75.64 1.74 0.44 0.40 1.33 100

MEVE 38 1.35 35.54 59.78 2.00 0.51 0.63 1.53 100

PECO 1 0.23 25.62 70.23 1.83 0.47 0.44 1.40 100

PEFO 2 0.19 25.42 72.18 1.07 0.27 0.23 0.83 100

SAPE 7 0.44 27.35 69.47 1.40 0.36 0.35 1.07 100

WEEL 0 0.22 33.65 63.72 1.18 0.30 0.22 0.92 100

WEMI 2 0.31 30.63 61.38 3.50 0.90 0.91 2.69 100

WHPE 2 0.18 28.38 69.83 0.82 0.21 0.13 0.64 100

SCR with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 2 0.28 47.72 44.36 3.44 0.88 0.95 2.66 100

BAND 0 0.12 49.45 43.72 3.01 0.77 0.71 2.33 100

BLCA 0 0.11 43.65 48.23 3.59 0.92 0.82 2.78 100

CANY 4 0.48 66.18 29.95 1.71 0.44 0.37 1.35 100

CARE 1 0.24 56.65 41.23 0.94 0.24 0.17 0.77 100

GRCA 0 0.11 61.55 34.38 1.80 0.46 0.36 1.45 100

GRSA 0 0.08 90.15 4.37 2.41 0.62 0.59 1.86 100

LAGA 0 0.08 45.60 46.29 3.52 0.90 0.98 2.71 100

MABE 0 0.05 84.36 11.11 2.02 0.52 0.44 1.56 100

MEVE 14 0.67 61.15 26.49 5.24 1.34 1.77 4.01 100

PECO 0 0.11 92.80 2.59 2.07 0.53 0.41 1.61 100

PEFO 1 0.09 64.46 32.41 1.39 0.36 0.26 1.12 100

SAPE 0 0.22 43.80 46.06 4.48 1.15 1.07 3.43 100

WEEL 0 0.09 43.21 48.64 3.62 0.93 0.79 2.81 100

WEMI 0 0.12 46.54 44.94 3.63 0.93 1.18 2.78 100

WHPE 0 0.10 81.90 11.01 3.17 0.81 0.66 2.45 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 125 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 11 0.64 26.15 67.85 1.45 0.89 1.39 2.27 100

BAND 7 0.50 48.55 42.63 2.30 1.40 1.49 3.62 100

BLCA 4 0.37 18.38 77.59 0.97 0.59 0.97 1.51 100

CANY 15 0.83 28.77 67.90 0.83 0.51 0.66 1.33 100

CARE 4 0.23 27.98 69.89 0.53 0.32 0.44 0.85 100

GRCA 1 0.20 40.86 56.90 0.57 0.35 0.37 0.95 100

GRSA 0 0.21 26.11 71.35 0.67 0.41 0.39 1.08 100

LAGA 0 0.29 22.65 73.82 0.90 0.55 0.64 1.44 100

MABE 0 0.16 26.26 66.39 2.05 1.25 0.74 3.32 100

MEVE 72 1.82 36.41 58.08 1.29 0.79 1.39 2.04 100

PECO 3 0.31 36.65 55.19 2.17 1.32 1.23 3.43 100

PEFO 2 0.16 26.72 70.61 0.69 0.42 0.43 1.13 100

SAPE 28 0.73 25.48 68.66 1.43 0.87 1.28 2.26 100

WEEL 1 0.29 22.95 71.57 1.32 0.81 1.29 2.06 100

WEMI 9 0.56 18.60 76.08 1.26 0.77 1.32 1.97 100

WHPE 0 0.26 28.49 69.36 0.55 0.33 0.38 0.89 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.54 23.96 72.89 1.38 0.35 0.35 1.07 100

BAND 4 0.40 31.03 66.81 0.95 0.24 0.22 0.74 100

BLCA 1 0.29 25.16 72.63 0.98 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

CANY 13 0.65 23.42 73.82 1.20 0.31 0.31 0.93 100

CARE 3 0.18 31.45 66.94 0.71 0.18 0.15 0.57 100

GRCA 1 0.16 43.73 54.87 0.62 0.16 0.11 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.14 27.52 70.87 0.73 0.19 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 0 0.21 25.77 71.45 1.21 0.31 0.33 0.93 100

MABE 0 0.11 26.89 71.16 0.88 0.22 0.16 0.69 100

MEVE 52 1.40 60.02 31.23 3.71 0.95 1.25 2.84 100

PECO 3 0.24 40.91 57.63 0.65 0.17 0.13 0.52 100

PEFO 0 0.13 28.41 69.90 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.61 100

SAPE 16 0.58 26.82 69.85 1.46 0.37 0.35 1.14 100

WEEL 0 0.20 24.64 72.13 1.41 0.36 0.38 1.08 100

WEMI 6 0.42 24.31 73.65 0.91 0.23 0.19 0.72 100

WHPE 0 0.17 31.55 67.09 0.61 0.16 0.12 0.48 100

SCR with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 1 0.22 48.01 42.23 4.26 1.09 1.13 3.29 100

BAND 1 0.19 68.95 27.51 1.55 0.40 0.37 1.22 100

BLCA 0 0.11 45.87 44.59 4.16 1.06 1.15 3.18 100

CANY 2 0.25 87.36 0.80 5.26 1.35 1.18 4.06 100

CARE 0 0.12 94.52 0.32 2.30 0.59 0.46 1.80 100

GRCA 0 0.10 71.18 25.16 1.62 0.42 0.30 1.32 100

GRSA 0 0.07 40.62 50.77 3.98 1.02 0.41 3.21 100

LAGA 0 0.08 44.82 48.07 3.15 0.81 0.73 2.43 100

MABE 0 0.05 48.35 43.82 3.44 0.88 0.88 2.64 100

MEVE 18 0.72 58.03 30.45 4.89 1.25 1.64 3.74 100

PECO 0 0.12 70.33 23.18 2.88 0.74 0.61 2.26 100

PEFO 0 0.08 94.76 0.81 1.99 0.51 0.35 1.58 100

SAPE 4 0.30 71.71 21.09 3.20 0.82 0.73 2.45 100

WEEL 0 0.09 61.21 33.28 2.45 0.63 0.51 1.92 100

WEMI 0 0.21 45.92 34.37 8.59 2.20 2.27 6.65 100

WHPE 0 0.09 77.40 15.50 3.27 0.84 0.43 2.57 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 126 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.58 26.09 65.91 1.91 1.16 1.95 2.97 100

BAND 8 0.54 21.18 73.48 1.31 0.80 1.19 2.04 100

BLCA 3 0.39 31.74 65.45 0.70 0.43 0.55 1.12 100

CANY 13 0.72 29.11 60.16 2.49 1.52 2.85 3.87 100

CARE 3 0.31 86.04 1.21 3.09 1.88 2.94 4.84 100

GRCA 0 0.16 49.96 44.45 1.42 0.86 1.00 2.29 100

GRSA 1 0.17 25.45 72.07 0.69 0.42 0.28 1.09 100

LAGA 1 0.29 19.38 74.87 1.61 0.98 0.49 2.66 100

MABE 0 0.16 31.67 65.36 0.73 0.45 0.63 1.16 100

MEVE 60 1.66 38.26 45.78 3.66 2.23 4.39 5.68 100

PECO 3 0.36 20.30 74.98 1.21 0.74 0.82 1.96 100

PEFO 0 0.14 69.40 24.51 1.58 0.96 0.97 2.58 100

SAPE 13 0.64 24.73 67.13 1.92 1.17 2.07 2.99 100

WEEL 0 0.26 22.86 71.46 1.39 0.85 1.25 2.20 100

WEMI 4 0.44 37.67 57.85 1.06 0.65 1.12 1.65 100

WHPE 1 0.26 32.19 65.39 0.61 0.37 0.45 0.98 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.52 29.52 67.08 1.47 0.38 0.40 1.15 100

BAND 3 0.37 23.81 72.96 1.42 0.36 0.36 1.09 100

BLCA 0 0.28 25.40 72.77 0.80 0.21 0.19 0.64 100

CANY 12 0.57 38.31 60.22 0.65 0.17 0.14 0.52 100

CARE 2 0.23 31.25 65.23 1.54 0.39 0.39 1.20 100

GRCA 0 0.12 52.36 44.18 1.53 0.39 0.31 1.22 100

GRSA 1 0.14 27.01 70.46 1.13 0.29 0.22 0.89 100

LAGA 0 0.21 20.74 75.52 1.72 0.44 0.17 1.40 100

MABE 0 0.11 33.14 63.55 1.54 0.39 0.19 1.19 100

MEVE 48 1.26 41.89 48.65 4.03 1.03 1.33 3.08 100

PECO 1 0.27 46.68 51.28 0.92 0.24 0.15 0.73 100

PEFO 0 0.11 72.61 23.59 1.70 0.44 0.30 1.37 100

SAPE 7 0.50 26.73 68.43 2.09 0.53 0.62 1.60 100

WEEL 0 0.20 20.87 76.49 1.16 0.30 0.29 0.89 100

WEMI 3 0.35 45.70 42.79 4.98 1.28 1.43 3.82 100

WHPE 0 0.20 22.74 73.73 1.56 0.40 0.34 1.22 100

SCR with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 0 0.25 57.18 35.84 3.09 0.79 0.60 2.50 100

BAND 0 0.17 94.06 0.41 2.47 0.63 0.52 1.91 100

BLCA 0 0.13 66.51 25.60 3.43 0.88 0.92 2.66 100

CANY 3 0.30 71.10 22.79 2.67 0.68 0.64 2.12 100

CARE 0 0.15 90.47 0.23 4.02 1.03 1.13 3.12 100

GRCA 0 0.08 87.79 5.90 2.79 0.71 0.61 2.20 100

GRSA 0 0.07 76.12 18.82 2.26 0.58 0.47 1.76 100

LAGA 0 0.09 40.71 44.22 6.87 1.76 1.02 5.43 100

MABE 0 0.05 65.74 30.58 1.62 0.41 0.37 1.28 100

MEVE 15 0.61 57.78 18.07 10.30 2.64 3.34 7.87 100

PECO 0 0.15 78.32 14.76 3.10 0.79 0.57 2.45 100

PEFO 0 0.08 94.29 2.26 1.53 0.39 0.33 1.21 100

SAPE 0 0.23 58.62 32.64 3.85 0.98 0.93 2.97 100

WEEL 0 0.09 50.81 43.11 2.67 0.68 0.59 2.13 100

WEMI 0 0.13 47.69 27.44 10.61 2.71 3.44 8.11 100

WHPE 0 0.10 67.97 28.77 1.45 0.37 0.30 1.15 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 127 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 1.04 37.90 59.89 0.56 0.35 0.41 0.89 100

BAND 9 0.53 76.32 16.85 1.73 1.07 1.30 2.73 100

BLCA 10 0.58 27.65 66.71 1.42 0.87 1.14 2.21 100

CANY 35 1.44 35.63 61.86 0.63 0.39 0.48 1.02 100

CARE 17 1.10 29.96 67.35 0.65 0.40 0.61 1.03 100

GRCA 7 0.48 30.18 67.22 0.65 0.40 0.53 1.03 100

GRSA 1 0.28 76.24 15.49 2.27 1.39 1.03 3.58 100

LAGA 4 0.40 39.72 57.57 0.70 0.43 0.45 1.13 100

MABE 1 0.24 35.97 61.92 0.56 0.35 0.32 0.89 100

MEVE 100 1.92 53.68 38.69 1.83 1.12 1.82 2.86 100

PECO 6 0.48 51.34 44.27 1.13 0.69 0.80 1.77 100

PEFO 5 0.43 86.46 10.06 0.89 0.55 0.62 1.42 100

SAPE 31 0.88 30.39 63.58 1.46 0.90 1.41 2.26 100

WEEL 6 0.38 37.70 56.66 1.47 0.91 0.92 2.33 100

WEMI 9 0.59 26.83 67.21 1.46 0.90 1.33 2.28 100

WHPE 5 0.37 29.53 67.67 0.74 0.45 0.44 1.17 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 0.89 35.30 62.84 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.66 100

BAND 3 0.39 26.98 70.54 1.12 0.28 0.21 0.87 100

BLCA 4 0.44 25.68 71.04 1.46 0.37 0.33 1.12 100

CANY 29 1.15 32.46 66.00 0.68 0.17 0.15 0.54 100

CARE 14 0.86 26.87 71.56 0.68 0.17 0.18 0.54 100

GRCA 5 0.35 27.44 70.95 0.71 0.18 0.17 0.56 100

GRSA 0 0.21 36.16 57.33 2.97 0.75 0.50 2.30 100

LAGA 1 0.29 25.67 70.62 1.64 0.42 0.37 1.27 100

MABE 0 0.20 33.23 64.11 1.21 0.30 0.21 0.95 100

MEVE 64 1.56 52.43 37.30 4.36 1.10 1.46 3.35 100

PECO 3 0.35 87.02 9.06 1.73 0.44 0.41 1.34 100

PEFO 2 0.29 85.92 11.67 1.07 0.27 0.21 0.85 100

SAPE 18 0.70 27.84 68.80 1.47 0.37 0.39 1.13 100

WEEL 4 0.30 34.05 62.90 1.38 0.35 0.24 1.08 100

WEMI 6 0.44 21.26 75.66 1.32 0.33 0.40 1.03 100

WHPE 2 0.28 27.58 70.65 0.80 0.20 0.14 0.63 100

SCR with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 4 0.43 52.71 41.29 2.68 0.68 0.47 2.17 100

BAND 0 0.19 89.99 3.54 2.87 0.72 0.65 2.23 100

BLCA 0 0.17 44.39 47.67 3.51 0.89 0.80 2.74 100

CANY 10 0.59 67.17 28.99 1.70 0.43 0.36 1.35 100

CARE 5 0.35 56.21 39.81 1.73 0.44 0.45 1.36 100

GRCA 1 0.17 95.96 0.45 1.60 0.40 0.34 1.25 100

GRSA 0 0.13 89.74 4.65 2.47 0.62 0.60 1.92 100

LAGA 0 0.14 57.86 35.22 3.12 0.79 0.59 2.42 100

MABE 0 0.08 89.42 4.26 2.83 0.71 0.55 2.23 100

MEVE 25 0.87 44.29 46.01 4.12 1.04 1.37 3.17 100

PECO 0 0.18 92.73 2.59 2.09 0.53 0.42 1.64 100

PEFO 1 0.15 64.64 32.26 1.38 0.35 0.26 1.11 100

SAPE 2 0.36 42.78 46.64 4.66 1.18 1.18 3.58 100

WEEL 0 0.13 85.29 8.44 2.79 0.70 0.57 2.21 100

WEMI 0 0.20 58.37 35.12 2.77 0.70 0.91 2.13 100

WHPE 0 0.16 63.69 30.91 2.43 0.61 0.47 1.89 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 128 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 15 0.81 31.17 63.37 1.30 0.80 1.33 2.03 100

BAND 20 0.81 28.33 63.99 1.89 1.16 1.69 2.94 100

BLCA 9 0.53 21.84 73.75 1.06 0.65 1.04 1.65 100

CANY 22 1.04 23.62 71.52 1.13 0.70 1.26 1.76 100

CARE 5 0.38 34.41 62.98 0.66 0.40 0.48 1.07 100

GRCA 3 0.33 45.95 51.86 0.55 0.34 0.36 0.92 100

GRSA 3 0.33 82.46 13.08 1.16 0.71 0.76 1.83 100

LAGA 5 0.44 25.09 67.37 1.91 1.17 1.50 2.97 100

MABE 0 0.25 28.79 63.57 2.12 1.30 0.81 3.42 100

MEVE 95 2.18 50.54 42.30 1.67 1.03 1.84 2.63 100

PECO 8 0.52 43.31 54.53 0.56 0.34 0.37 0.89 100

PEFO 5 0.25 91.13 1.98 1.75 1.08 1.27 2.80 100

SAPE 43 1.03 34.16 58.88 1.69 1.04 1.59 2.64 100

WEEL 5 0.42 34.33 58.68 1.81 1.11 1.22 2.86 100

WEMI 23 0.82 31.35 66.25 0.58 0.36 0.54 0.92 100

WHPE 3 0.39 33.90 60.27 1.53 0.94 0.95 2.41 100

Baseline - Consent Decree 

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 12 0.65 29.26 66.96 1.65 0.42 0.45 1.27 100

BAND 10 0.57 52.51 41.86 2.54 0.64 0.47 1.97 100

BLCA 5 0.41 28.10 70.16 0.78 0.20 0.14 0.62 100

CANY 17 0.85 30.97 66.94 0.92 0.23 0.21 0.73 100

CARE 5 0.26 91.08 1.83 3.13 0.79 0.70 2.47 100

GRCA 3 0.24 42.65 55.95 0.62 0.16 0.12 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.24 27.92 70.46 0.73 0.18 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 1 0.33 22.49 73.90 1.64 0.41 0.29 1.26 100

MABE 0 0.18 27.59 70.65 0.80 0.20 0.13 0.63 100

MEVE 76 1.90 42.51 53.81 1.58 0.40 0.48 1.23 100

PECO 5 0.36 30.99 66.44 1.17 0.30 0.18 0.91 100

PEFO 3 0.18 28.46 69.86 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.61 100

SAPE 34 0.81 28.26 67.95 1.66 0.42 0.43 1.29 100

WEEL 4 0.33 32.22 63.43 1.95 0.49 0.38 1.52 100

WEMI 16 0.64 31.41 61.73 2.93 0.74 0.94 2.25 100

WHPE 0 0.31 44.36 54.39 0.55 0.14 0.11 0.44 100

SCR with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 3 0.28 43.35 47.22 4.13 1.04 1.08 3.18 100

BAND 3 0.26 69.79 26.82 1.49 0.38 0.34 1.17 100

BLCA 0 0.17 66.06 28.34 2.49 0.63 0.53 1.95 100

CANY 5 0.37 59.85 35.24 2.17 0.55 0.48 1.72 100

CARE 0 0.18 94.54 0.32 2.30 0.58 0.46 1.80 100

GRCA 0 0.14 72.68 23.39 1.75 0.44 0.33 1.41 100

GRSA 0 0.11 41.01 50.27 4.02 1.01 0.41 3.28 100

LAGA 0 0.13 47.31 44.59 3.50 0.88 1.02 2.70 100

MABE 0 0.09 48.82 43.03 3.57 0.90 0.94 2.74 100

MEVE 32 1.01 57.58 37.32 2.19 0.55 0.63 1.72 100

PECO 0 0.18 50.24 39.84 4.45 1.12 0.92 3.43 100

PEFO 0 0.13 94.75 0.82 1.99 0.50 0.35 1.58 100

SAPE 5 0.38 53.55 36.70 4.26 1.08 1.13 3.29 100

WEEL 0 0.14 59.90 29.07 4.96 1.25 0.94 3.87 100

WEMI 0 0.27 48.20 44.41 3.19 0.80 0.93 2.47 100

WHPE 0 0.14 58.73 38.12 1.43 0.36 0.23 1.13 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 129 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.72 30.15 61.20 2.06 1.26 2.13 3.19 100

BAND 15 0.71 23.24 69.03 1.92 1.18 1.63 2.99 100

BLCA 9 0.59 23.67 72.71 0.88 0.54 0.82 1.38 100

CANY 19 0.96 32.66 55.96 2.65 1.63 2.99 4.11 100

CARE 9 0.52 48.88 48.12 0.75 0.46 0.56 1.23 100

GRCA 3 0.26 91.93 1.11 1.76 1.08 1.29 2.83 100

GRSA 3 0.27 49.52 46.33 1.06 0.65 0.76 1.68 100

LAGA 5 0.43 22.09 71.73 1.75 1.07 0.58 2.78 100

MABE 0 0.25 27.57 67.94 1.12 0.69 0.91 1.76 100

MEVE 92 2.14 70.75 6.38 5.19 3.19 6.44 8.05 100

PECO 12 0.58 54.64 39.46 1.53 0.94 0.97 2.45 100

PEFO 1 0.24 88.09 6.50 1.41 0.87 0.86 2.28 100

SAPE 34 0.88 39.44 54.36 1.46 0.90 1.58 2.27 100

WEEL 4 0.38 22.78 73.96 0.83 0.51 0.60 1.31 100

WEMI 15 0.65 30.94 64.97 1.04 0.64 0.76 1.65 100

WHPE 4 0.37 24.02 69.82 1.56 0.96 1.20 2.46 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.66 29.12 65.81 2.19 0.55 0.65 1.68 100

BAND 8 0.61 31.91 64.13 1.75 0.44 0.40 1.36 100

BLCA 7 0.46 33.18 65.04 0.79 0.20 0.18 0.62 100

CANY 14 0.79 32.64 60.84 2.79 0.70 0.88 2.14 100

CARE 4 0.36 91.10 1.19 3.36 0.85 0.90 2.60 100

GRCA 0 0.19 52.76 43.76 1.54 0.39 0.32 1.23 100

GRSA 1 0.21 23.53 72.94 1.57 0.40 0.34 1.22 100

LAGA 3 0.33 21.25 74.88 1.79 0.45 0.16 1.47 100

MABE 0 0.18 22.58 74.94 1.09 0.27 0.27 0.85 100

MEVE 64 1.74 43.30 46.82 4.20 1.06 1.40 3.22 100

PECO 5 0.42 34.27 62.29 1.50 0.38 0.39 1.16 100

PEFO 1 0.17 72.31 23.90 1.69 0.43 0.30 1.36 100

SAPE 18 0.72 27.03 68.03 2.14 0.54 0.62 1.64 100

WEEL 2 0.35 23.08 74.48 1.07 0.27 0.28 0.83 100

WEMI 7 0.50 30.19 67.61 0.97 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

WHPE 2 0.28 90.86 5.64 1.60 0.40 0.26 1.24 100

SCR with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 3 0.29 79.33 17.53 1.39 0.35 0.30 1.10 100

BAND 1 0.25 94.12 0.43 2.43 0.61 0.51 1.89 100

BLCA 0 0.20 64.98 30.95 1.80 0.45 0.41 1.41 100

CANY 4 0.40 71.16 25.76 1.36 0.34 0.29 1.09 100

CARE 1 0.21 55.03 38.47 2.83 0.71 0.77 2.19 100

GRCA 0 0.12 78.89 16.96 1.83 0.46 0.38 1.48 100

GRSA 0 0.10 47.34 46.73 2.58 0.65 0.72 1.99 100

LAGA 0 0.14 49.66 42.75 3.37 0.85 0.75 2.61 100

MABE 0 0.07 66.10 29.83 1.78 0.45 0.45 1.39 100

MEVE 35 0.94 51.76 14.78 14.20 3.59 4.78 10.89 100

PECO 1 0.23 62.14 32.99 2.22 0.56 0.35 1.75 100

PEFO 0 0.13 94.26 2.29 1.53 0.39 0.33 1.21 100

SAPE 2 0.37 87.64 3.99 3.64 0.92 0.97 2.84 100

WEEL 0 0.13 65.84 29.59 2.03 0.51 0.43 1.59 100

WEMI 1 0.20 64.28 30.64 2.19 0.55 0.65 1.69 100

WHPE 0 0.14 73.36 23.27 1.54 0.39 0.23 1.22 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 130 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 1.05 38.73 59.14 0.54 0.33 0.40 0.86 100

BAND 9 0.54 77.25 16.22 1.66 1.02 1.24 2.61 100

BLCA 10 0.58 27.97 66.50 1.39 0.86 1.12 2.16 100

CANY 35 1.47 36.32 61.24 0.61 0.38 0.47 0.99 100

CARE 18 1.11 30.71 66.66 0.64 0.39 0.59 1.01 100

GRCA 7 0.48 31.01 66.45 0.63 0.39 0.51 1.00 100

GRSA 1 0.29 76.95 15.10 2.18 1.34 1.00 3.43 100

LAGA 4 0.40 40.66 56.73 0.68 0.42 0.44 1.09 100

MABE 1 0.24 69.36 25.32 1.36 0.84 0.94 2.18 100

MEVE 97 1.94 55.06 37.27 1.83 1.13 1.84 2.87 100

PECO 6 0.48 32.92 63.69 0.95 0.58 0.38 1.49 100

PEFO 5 0.44 29.28 67.84 0.68 0.42 0.71 1.07 100

SAPE 33 0.89 31.06 63.04 1.43 0.88 1.38 2.22 100

WEEL 6 0.38 38.50 56.07 1.42 0.88 0.88 2.25 100

WEMI 10 0.59 27.20 66.98 1.42 0.88 1.30 2.23 100

WHPE 5 0.37 30.24 67.03 0.72 0.44 0.43 1.14 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 0.88 35.06 63.08 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.66 100

BAND 3 0.38 26.97 70.54 1.12 0.29 0.20 0.87 100

BLCA 4 0.42 25.63 71.10 1.45 0.37 0.33 1.12 100

CANY 29 1.14 32.53 65.94 0.68 0.17 0.15 0.54 100

CARE 13 0.86 26.89 71.54 0.68 0.18 0.18 0.54 100

GRCA 5 0.36 27.72 70.68 0.70 0.18 0.16 0.55 100

GRSA 0 0.21 36.09 57.39 2.96 0.76 0.50 2.30 100

LAGA 1 0.28 36.17 62.10 0.77 0.20 0.14 0.61 100

MABE 0 0.20 33.07 64.29 1.19 0.31 0.21 0.94 100

MEVE 64 1.55 71.87 17.66 4.45 1.15 1.45 3.43 100

PECO 2 0.34 87.02 9.05 1.73 0.45 0.41 1.35 100

PEFO 2 0.29 85.93 11.66 1.07 0.28 0.21 0.85 100

SAPE 18 0.69 27.73 68.93 1.46 0.38 0.39 1.12 100

WEEL 4 0.30 33.81 63.19 1.36 0.35 0.23 1.07 100

WEMI 6 0.43 21.27 75.64 1.32 0.34 0.40 1.03 100

WHPE 2 0.28 27.76 70.47 0.80 0.21 0.13 0.63 100

SCR with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 4 0.42 52.65 41.34 2.67 0.69 0.47 2.18 100

BAND 0 0.18 89.99 3.52 2.87 0.74 0.65 2.24 100

BLCA 0 0.17 44.25 47.76 3.52 0.91 0.80 2.75 100

CANY 10 0.60 67.28 28.88 1.69 0.44 0.36 1.35 100

CARE 5 0.35 56.42 39.60 1.72 0.44 0.45 1.36 100

GRCA 1 0.16 95.95 0.45 1.59 0.41 0.34 1.26 100

GRSA 0 0.12 89.12 5.33 2.44 0.63 0.59 1.90 100

LAGA 0 0.14 57.57 35.42 3.15 0.81 0.59 2.45 100

MABE 0 0.08 84.23 11.33 1.97 0.51 0.43 1.54 100

MEVE 24 0.86 44.24 45.98 4.14 1.07 1.38 3.19 100

PECO 0 0.18 92.73 2.59 2.09 0.54 0.42 1.64 100

PEFO 1 0.15 64.65 32.24 1.38 0.36 0.26 1.11 100

SAPE 2 0.35 42.81 46.60 4.64 1.20 1.17 3.58 100

WEEL 0 0.13 85.29 8.43 2.78 0.72 0.57 2.21 100

WEMI 0 0.19 58.35 35.13 2.77 0.71 0.91 2.13 100

WHPE 0 0.16 63.81 30.79 2.42 0.62 0.47 1.89 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 131 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 15 0.84 33.46 63.61 0.73 0.45 0.58 1.17 100

BAND 20 0.81 53.16 38.54 2.16 1.33 1.41 3.39 100

BLCA 10 0.54 22.21 73.48 1.04 0.64 1.01 1.62 100

CANY 22 1.06 24.09 71.18 1.10 0.68 1.23 1.72 100

CARE 5 0.38 35.19 62.28 0.64 0.39 0.47 1.04 100

GRCA 3 0.34 47.06 50.82 0.54 0.33 0.35 0.90 100

GRSA 2 0.34 83.04 12.72 1.10 0.68 0.71 1.74 100

LAGA 4 0.45 81.97 13.16 1.28 0.79 0.74 2.05 100

MABE 0 0.25 28.95 63.55 2.07 1.28 0.79 3.36 100

MEVE 96 2.18 51.65 41.36 1.63 1.00 1.80 2.56 100

PECO 8 0.52 44.34 53.57 0.54 0.33 0.36 0.86 100

PEFO 5 0.27 91.57 1.90 1.66 1.02 1.20 2.65 100

SAPE 43 1.04 34.95 58.17 1.67 1.03 1.57 2.61 100

WEEL 5 0.43 35.21 57.78 1.81 1.12 1.23 2.86 100

WEMI 25 0.81 32.08 65.59 0.56 0.35 0.53 0.90 100

WHPE 4 0.41 34.54 59.79 1.49 0.92 0.93 2.35 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 12 0.65 29.14 67.09 1.64 0.42 0.45 1.27 100

BAND 10 0.56 52.56 41.80 2.54 0.65 0.47 1.98 100

BLCA 4 0.42 20.20 77.31 1.08 0.28 0.30 0.83 100

CANY 17 0.85 30.88 67.04 0.92 0.24 0.20 0.73 100

CARE 5 0.26 91.06 1.83 3.12 0.81 0.70 2.47 100

GRCA 3 0.24 42.57 56.03 0.62 0.16 0.12 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.23 28.00 70.38 0.73 0.19 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 1 0.32 22.47 73.91 1.64 0.42 0.29 1.27 100

MABE 0 0.19 28.63 66.47 2.26 0.58 0.24 1.82 100

MEVE 75 1.89 42.10 54.26 1.56 0.40 0.47 1.22 100

PECO 5 0.35 30.81 66.63 1.17 0.30 0.18 0.91 100

PEFO 3 0.18 28.47 69.84 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.61 100

SAPE 34 0.80 28.16 68.06 1.65 0.42 0.42 1.29 100

WEEL 4 0.33 24.93 71.68 1.47 0.38 0.41 1.13 100

WEMI 13 0.63 31.35 61.78 2.92 0.75 0.93 2.26 100

WHPE 0 0.30 44.20 54.55 0.55 0.14 0.11 0.44 100

SCR with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 3 0.27 43.33 47.22 4.12 1.06 1.08 3.19 100

BAND 3 0.26 69.65 26.94 1.50 0.39 0.35 1.18 100

BLCA 0 0.17 66.00 28.40 2.48 0.64 0.53 1.95 100

CANY 5 0.37 59.85 35.24 2.16 0.56 0.48 1.72 100

CARE 0 0.18 94.53 0.32 2.29 0.59 0.46 1.80 100

GRCA 0 0.14 72.75 23.31 1.74 0.45 0.33 1.41 100

GRSA 0 0.10 41.06 50.21 4.00 1.03 0.41 3.29 100

LAGA 0 0.13 47.39 44.49 3.50 0.90 1.02 2.70 100

MABE 0 0.09 48.80 43.04 3.56 0.92 0.94 2.74 100

MEVE 30 0.99 57.30 37.58 2.19 0.57 0.64 1.72 100

PECO 0 0.17 50.30 39.76 4.44 1.14 0.92 3.44 100

PEFO 0 0.12 94.75 0.82 1.98 0.51 0.35 1.59 100

SAPE 4 0.38 53.53 36.72 4.24 1.09 1.12 3.29 100

WEEL 0 0.13 59.75 29.22 4.94 1.27 0.95 3.87 100

WEMI 0 0.26 48.67 43.95 3.18 0.82 0.93 2.47 100

WHPE 0 0.14 58.68 38.15 1.43 0.37 0.23 1.14 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 132 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.74 30.46 60.93 2.04 1.26 2.14 3.18 100

BAND 15 0.71 23.48 68.94 1.88 1.16 1.60 2.93 100

BLCA 9 0.59 37.08 55.34 1.83 1.13 1.78 2.84 100

CANY 20 0.97 32.92 55.93 2.59 1.60 2.93 4.03 100

CARE 9 0.53 49.90 47.20 0.72 0.45 0.54 1.19 100

GRCA 3 0.27 92.31 1.07 1.68 1.03 1.22 2.69 100

GRSA 3 0.27 24.99 69.23 1.46 0.90 1.12 2.30 100

LAGA 5 0.43 22.20 71.74 1.71 1.06 0.56 2.72 100

MABE 0 0.24 24.98 71.07 0.97 0.60 0.87 1.52 100

MEVE 93 2.15 71.14 6.46 5.08 3.13 6.31 7.88 100

PECO 12 0.59 55.50 38.80 1.48 0.91 0.94 2.37 100

PEFO 1 0.25 88.57 6.28 1.34 0.83 0.81 2.17 100

SAPE 35 0.88 28.38 62.72 2.09 1.29 2.27 3.25 100

WEEL 5 0.39 23.21 73.59 0.82 0.50 0.58 1.29 100

WEMI 15 0.65 31.61 64.42 1.01 0.63 0.73 1.61 100

WHPE 4 0.38 24.18 69.77 1.52 0.94 1.18 2.41 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.63 28.93 66.06 2.16 0.56 0.63 1.67 100

BAND 8 0.60 23.30 73.35 1.46 0.38 0.38 1.13 100

BLCA 7 0.44 33.38 64.83 0.79 0.20 0.18 0.62 100

CANY 13 0.78 32.54 60.94 2.78 0.72 0.88 2.14 100

CARE 4 0.35 91.08 1.19 3.35 0.86 0.90 2.61 100

GRCA 0 0.18 52.85 43.67 1.54 0.40 0.32 1.23 100

GRSA 1 0.21 23.53 72.93 1.57 0.41 0.34 1.23 100

LAGA 3 0.32 21.23 74.90 1.79 0.46 0.16 1.47 100

MABE 0 0.18 22.92 75.41 0.73 0.19 0.18 0.57 100

MEVE 63 1.73 44.56 45.24 4.32 1.11 1.44 3.33 100

PECO 5 0.41 52.81 43.33 1.73 0.45 0.31 1.38 100

PEFO 1 0.17 31.86 65.63 1.13 0.29 0.18 0.92 100

SAPE 17 0.69 26.79 68.32 2.10 0.54 0.62 1.62 100

WEEL 1 0.33 23.22 75.05 0.76 0.19 0.19 0.59 100

WEMI 6 0.49 30.25 67.54 0.97 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

WHPE 2 0.28 90.85 5.63 1.59 0.41 0.26 1.24 100

SCR with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 3 0.29 79.37 17.49 1.38 0.36 0.30 1.10 100

BAND 0 0.25 94.11 0.43 2.43 0.63 0.51 1.89 100

BLCA 0 0.20 65.19 30.74 1.79 0.46 0.40 1.41 100

CANY 4 0.39 71.16 25.75 1.36 0.35 0.29 1.09 100

CARE 1 0.20 55.06 38.43 2.82 0.73 0.77 2.19 100

GRCA 0 0.12 78.94 16.90 1.83 0.47 0.38 1.48 100

GRSA 0 0.10 47.37 46.69 2.57 0.66 0.72 1.99 100

LAGA 0 0.14 49.75 42.67 3.36 0.87 0.75 2.61 100

MABE 0 0.07 67.65 28.33 1.76 0.45 0.40 1.40 100

MEVE 34 0.92 51.60 15.01 14.12 3.64 4.76 10.87 100

PECO 1 0.23 62.09 33.01 2.22 0.57 0.35 1.76 100

PEFO 0 0.13 94.24 2.30 1.53 0.39 0.33 1.21 100

SAPE 2 0.37 87.57 4.02 3.64 0.94 0.98 2.85 100

WEEL 0 0.13 65.86 29.57 2.03 0.52 0.43 1.60 100

WEMI 1 0.20 64.33 30.61 2.17 0.56 0.64 1.68 100

WHPE 0 0.14 73.36 23.25 1.54 0.40 0.23 1.23 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 133 of 148 

SCR/SNCR Hybrid with Inherent SO3 Removal and 

Sorbent Injection 
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 134 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 59 1.92 71.14 23.07 1.46 0.89 1.08 2.36 100

BAND 70 1.31 35.48 59.51 1.32 0.81 0.83 2.06 100

BLCA 40 1.14 52.26 45.03 0.71 0.44 0.43 1.13 100

CANY 80 2.59 65.05 28.99 1.51 0.92 1.08 2.44 100

CARE 31 1.97 51.54 43.71 1.15 0.71 1.06 1.83 100

GRCA 14 1.14 42.20 54.25 0.90 0.55 0.65 1.45 100

GRSA 23 0.85 77.31 14.03 2.38 1.46 1.09 3.75 100

LAGA 35 1.15 42.48 54.54 0.77 0.47 0.50 1.24 100

MABE 16 0.67 41.50 54.30 1.08 0.66 0.76 1.70 100

MEVE 184 4.20 84.29 1.94 3.21 1.97 3.57 5.03 100

PECO 53 1.40 43.19 52.60 1.08 0.66 0.76 1.71 100

PEFO 18 1.13 84.94 9.80 1.30 0.79 1.11 2.06 100

SAPE 111 1.78 79.88 8.73 2.70 1.65 2.83 4.20 100

WEEL 34 0.99 40.76 54.57 1.20 0.73 0.85 1.89 100

WEMI 74 1.51 26.70 66.76 1.53 0.94 1.66 2.40 100

WHPE 37 1.00 32.06 63.10 1.28 0.78 0.76 2.02 100

Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 47 1.69 33.57 62.13 1.88 0.48 0.48 1.46 100

BAND 49 1.04 30.40 66.83 1.26 0.32 0.23 0.97 100

BLCA 26 0.95 37.13 57.66 2.28 0.58 0.58 1.76 100

CANY 67 2.26 55.66 38.57 2.53 0.65 0.62 1.98 100

CARE 28 1.81 52.95 42.68 1.91 0.49 0.48 1.49 100

GRCA 12 0.97 38.14 59.75 0.93 0.24 0.19 0.75 100

GRSA 14 0.63 38.82 54.18 3.18 0.81 0.53 2.47 100

LAGA 20 0.86 38.38 59.80 0.81 0.21 0.15 0.65 100

MABE 10 0.54 69.46 25.41 2.29 0.59 0.43 1.83 100

MEVE 157 3.38 75.39 9.84 6.26 1.60 2.09 4.82 100

PECO 35 1.05 80.51 15.41 1.83 0.47 0.36 1.43 100

PEFO 14 0.82 27.95 69.41 1.18 0.30 0.25 0.92 100

SAPE 93 1.40 39.89 53.93 2.71 0.69 0.68 2.09 100

WEEL 19 0.80 37.76 60.62 0.70 0.18 0.19 0.55 100

WEMI 53 1.15 28.74 65.59 2.44 0.62 0.72 1.88 100

WHPE 27 0.75 30.82 66.18 1.36 0.35 0.23 1.06 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 35 1.41 29.06 65.47 2.39 0.61 0.62 1.86 100

BAND 32 0.80 88.54 6.14 2.35 0.60 0.53 1.84 100

BLCA 14 0.73 76.20 17.52 2.81 0.72 0.50 2.26 100

CANY 51 1.95 68.31 27.75 1.74 0.45 0.37 1.38 100

CARE 23 1.43 42.95 54.03 1.31 0.34 0.34 1.03 100

GRCA 11 0.72 44.24 52.86 1.28 0.33 0.26 1.03 100

GRSA 7 0.49 81.65 10.95 3.41 0.87 0.46 2.66 100

LAGA 11 0.60 48.80 48.56 1.18 0.30 0.22 0.94 100

MABE 4 0.41 76.35 18.86 2.13 0.54 0.42 1.69 100

MEVE 126 2.41 78.97 3.09 7.64 1.95 2.47 5.89 100

PECO 18 0.73 50.78 45.39 1.71 0.44 0.34 1.34 100

PEFO 11 0.65 36.22 60.88 1.25 0.32 0.35 0.98 100

SAPE 64 1.16 69.11 23.35 3.26 0.83 0.94 2.51 100

WEEL 10 0.61 44.82 50.34 2.18 0.56 0.39 1.71 100

WEMI 33 0.82 29.87 64.10 2.64 0.67 0.68 2.04 100

WHPE 12 0.57 70.23 23.54 2.77 0.71 0.59 2.15 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 135 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 46 1.76 43.87 46.41 2.37 1.45 2.20 3.70 100

BAND 87 1.86 44.28 49.89 1.45 0.89 1.18 2.31 100

BLCA 54 1.34 35.37 59.23 1.36 0.83 1.04 2.17 100

CANY 67 2.04 83.50 1.79 3.67 2.25 3.05 5.74 100

CARE 24 1.16 33.88 63.47 0.67 0.41 0.49 1.09 100

GRCA 15 0.93 89.85 2.03 2.09 1.28 1.45 3.30 100

GRSA 28 1.00 82.39 12.99 1.20 0.73 0.78 1.90 100

LAGA 63 1.30 81.37 13.32 1.40 0.86 0.81 2.24 100

MABE 20 0.78 28.96 63.27 2.15 1.32 0.80 3.49 100

MEVE 184 4.09 34.40 60.73 1.18 0.72 1.11 1.87 100

PECO 62 1.33 53.02 40.33 1.81 1.11 0.89 2.85 100

PEFO 16 0.79 90.95 1.94 1.81 1.11 1.31 2.89 100

SAPE 125 2.37 71.74 23.38 1.23 0.75 0.94 1.96 100

WEEL 43 1.15 35.15 60.78 1.03 0.63 0.76 1.65 100

WEMI 117 1.85 57.89 29.83 2.89 1.77 3.13 4.49 100

WHPE 40 0.95 55.69 38.20 1.67 1.02 0.74 2.67 100

Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 32 1.65 49.70 47.38 1.28 0.33 0.30 1.01 100

BAND 61 1.56 37.39 59.91 1.19 0.30 0.27 0.93 100

BLCA 30 1.15 31.11 65.99 1.28 0.33 0.28 1.02 100

CANY 57 1.73 52.51 43.96 1.55 0.40 0.35 1.23 100

CARE 18 0.82 91.30 1.66 3.11 0.79 0.69 2.46 100

GRCA 10 0.76 44.30 54.26 0.64 0.16 0.12 0.52 100

GRSA 17 0.71 28.48 69.87 0.74 0.19 0.13 0.60 100

LAGA 40 0.94 26.32 71.29 1.07 0.27 0.22 0.84 100

MABE 11 0.56 84.39 12.71 1.31 0.33 0.23 1.03 100

MEVE 162 3.53 85.08 5.44 4.14 1.06 1.04 3.24 100

PECO 41 1.09 41.87 56.64 0.66 0.17 0.13 0.53 100

PEFO 9 0.60 28.65 69.64 0.76 0.19 0.13 0.62 100

SAPE 109 2.01 46.15 47.36 2.82 0.72 0.76 2.19 100

WEEL 24 0.91 30.66 67.44 0.86 0.22 0.14 0.68 100

WEMI 83 1.48 57.20 35.77 3.02 0.77 0.91 2.32 100

WHPE 20 0.86 47.51 47.27 2.35 0.60 0.43 1.84 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 27 1.25 41.79 55.33 1.26 0.32 0.28 1.01 100

BAND 38 1.11 50.66 44.23 2.25 0.58 0.51 1.77 100

BLCA 19 0.80 40.57 56.60 1.28 0.33 0.21 1.02 100

CANY 44 1.38 66.26 24.81 3.92 1.00 0.94 3.06 100

CARE 12 0.58 42.35 55.17 1.09 0.28 0.23 0.88 100

GRCA 9 0.56 92.26 1.44 2.81 0.72 0.56 2.20 100

GRSA 8 0.55 90.36 5.70 1.78 0.46 0.29 1.41 100

LAGA 14 0.63 26.44 65.54 3.56 0.91 0.80 2.74 100

MABE 2 0.38 37.74 59.01 1.45 0.37 0.28 1.15 100

MEVE 134 2.65 81.86 4.96 5.76 1.47 1.44 4.50 100

PECO 19 0.78 53.53 44.37 0.94 0.24 0.18 0.74 100

PEFO 6 0.44 36.86 59.60 1.58 0.40 0.26 1.29 100

SAPE 71 1.47 35.03 58.43 2.86 0.73 0.72 2.23 100

WEEL 13 0.60 29.96 64.26 2.52 0.64 0.69 1.94 100

WEMI 46 1.13 43.59 53.88 1.11 0.28 0.28 0.86 100

WHPE 11 0.63 41.25 56.63 0.94 0.24 0.19 0.75 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 136 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 39 1.82 38.16 50.64 2.67 1.63 2.75 4.15 100

BAND 77 1.51 40.84 49.83 2.33 1.43 1.94 3.63 100

BLCA 30 1.40 29.26 67.79 0.76 0.46 0.52 1.21 100

CANY 57 2.00 64.92 31.30 0.94 0.58 0.72 1.53 100

CARE 25 1.34 43.68 49.81 1.57 0.96 1.51 2.47 100

GRCA 11 0.81 91.83 0.94 1.83 1.12 1.34 2.94 100

GRSA 26 0.82 50.03 45.62 1.12 0.68 0.79 1.76 100

LAGA 40 1.14 25.27 67.60 2.02 1.24 0.66 3.22 100

MABE 15 0.63 36.60 57.88 1.53 0.94 0.65 2.41 100

MEVE 174 4.85 69.32 17.06 3.27 2.00 3.22 5.14 100

PECO 63 1.26 49.00 43.40 1.87 1.15 1.66 2.93 100

PEFO 17 0.74 88.02 6.36 1.46 0.90 0.89 2.36 100

SAPE 127 1.96 80.84 9.41 2.36 1.45 2.22 3.73 100

WEEL 31 0.94 25.57 71.56 0.70 0.43 0.61 1.12 100

WEMI 87 1.69 40.63 54.52 1.17 0.72 1.13 1.84 100

WHPE 48 1.05 48.42 48.68 0.78 0.48 0.39 1.25 100

Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 27 1.49 30.95 67.01 0.89 0.23 0.21 0.71 100

BAND 57 1.20 77.97 17.21 2.11 0.54 0.52 1.65 100

BLCA 21 1.07 27.98 70.17 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.65 100

CANY 48 1.68 70.45 24.81 2.07 0.53 0.49 1.65 100

CARE 23 1.05 52.60 45.24 0.94 0.24 0.20 0.77 100

GRCA 9 0.57 93.89 1.17 2.19 0.56 0.46 1.74 100

GRSA 15 0.64 27.42 70.94 0.76 0.19 0.09 0.60 100

LAGA 28 0.90 23.76 71.98 1.99 0.51 0.18 1.58 100

MABE 8 0.51 27.63 69.59 1.22 0.31 0.28 0.97 100

MEVE 159 3.80 41.19 53.18 2.41 0.62 0.72 1.88 100

PECO 50 1.00 51.25 46.75 0.89 0.23 0.18 0.70 100

PEFO 9 0.53 32.43 65.01 1.15 0.29 0.18 0.93 100

SAPE 97 1.56 37.04 56.49 2.78 0.71 0.83 2.15 100

WEEL 22 0.83 28.10 67.91 1.74 0.44 0.44 1.36 100

WEMI 63 1.34 36.23 61.45 1.00 0.26 0.29 0.77 100

WHPE 27 0.89 91.09 5.38 1.60 0.41 0.26 1.25 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 22 1.11 33.29 57.64 3.92 1.00 1.14 3.02 100

BAND 36 0.94 32.54 60.69 2.96 0.76 0.76 2.29 100

BLCA 13 0.87 37.45 57.60 2.15 0.55 0.56 1.69 100

CANY 39 1.39 56.12 35.92 3.46 0.88 0.88 2.75 100

CARE 18 0.83 50.85 46.30 1.24 0.32 0.29 1.00 100

GRCA 7 0.50 61.50 35.26 1.43 0.36 0.29 1.15 100

GRSA 6 0.43 58.89 37.19 1.74 0.45 0.36 1.37 100

LAGA 11 0.63 52.78 43.74 1.56 0.40 0.27 1.25 100

MABE 4 0.35 30.55 65.31 1.82 0.46 0.42 1.43 100

MEVE 132 2.83 36.97 41.45 9.14 2.34 3.08 7.03 100

PECO 29 0.82 50.63 43.14 2.72 0.69 0.71 2.10 100

PEFO 6 0.44 80.26 15.06 2.09 0.53 0.37 1.68 100

SAPE 73 1.28 86.36 7.46 2.72 0.69 0.65 2.11 100

WEEL 11 0.56 31.89 65.29 1.23 0.31 0.30 0.97 100

WEMI 39 0.94 51.38 44.45 1.79 0.46 0.53 1.39 100

WHPE 13 0.63 31.96 63.40 2.10 0.54 0.35 1.65 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 137 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 16 0.82 25.92 68.87 1.30 0.79 1.06 2.06 100

BAND 1 0.31 41.96 53.16 1.24 0.75 0.94 1.95 100

BLCA 2 0.35 31.77 66.43 0.47 0.29 0.29 0.75 100

CANY 28 1.10 43.62 52.48 0.91 0.55 1.03 1.41 100

CARE 12 0.76 26.38 71.01 0.64 0.38 0.58 1.01 100

GRCA 5 0.31 31.06 66.09 0.72 0.44 0.52 1.17 100

GRSA 0 0.18 87.77 6.73 1.38 0.83 1.12 2.17 100

LAGA 1 0.26 36.35 60.88 0.72 0.44 0.46 1.16 100

MABE 0 0.18 23.69 72.07 1.08 0.65 0.82 1.69 100

MEVE 55 1.51 47.09 35.97 3.88 2.35 4.67 6.04 100

PECO 2 0.29 24.39 68.71 1.72 1.04 1.48 2.67 100

PEFO 2 0.25 84.76 11.37 0.99 0.60 0.69 1.59 100

SAPE 10 0.61 26.56 68.07 1.32 0.80 1.20 2.05 100

WEEL 2 0.27 31.55 66.50 0.52 0.31 0.29 0.82 100

WEMI 3 0.37 22.71 69.34 1.89 1.14 1.99 2.93 100

WHPE 2 0.24 27.68 69.49 0.76 0.46 0.42 1.20 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.69 25.34 71.69 1.31 0.33 0.31 1.03 100

BAND 1 0.24 43.57 53.42 1.34 0.34 0.29 1.04 100

BLCA 2 0.29 23.45 74.26 0.99 0.25 0.26 0.78 100

CANY 22 1.00 38.19 59.52 1.01 0.26 0.23 0.80 100

CARE 11 0.57 26.93 71.52 0.67 0.17 0.17 0.53 100

GRCA 4 0.27 30.85 67.43 0.76 0.19 0.15 0.61 100

GRSA 0 0.14 21.45 76.75 0.80 0.20 0.17 0.63 100

LAGA 0 0.19 28.88 69.14 0.89 0.23 0.16 0.70 100

MABE 0 0.14 20.45 75.64 1.73 0.44 0.40 1.34 100

MEVE 38 1.35 35.69 59.62 2.00 0.51 0.63 1.55 100

PECO 1 0.23 25.62 70.23 1.82 0.47 0.44 1.41 100

PEFO 2 0.19 25.42 72.19 1.06 0.27 0.23 0.84 100

SAPE 7 0.44 27.36 69.47 1.39 0.36 0.35 1.08 100

WEEL 0 0.22 33.65 63.73 1.17 0.30 0.22 0.93 100

WEMI 2 0.31 30.63 61.38 3.48 0.89 0.91 2.70 100

WHPE 2 0.19 28.38 69.83 0.81 0.21 0.13 0.64 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 5 0.44 40.18 57.32 1.10 0.28 0.23 0.89 100

BAND 0 0.16 31.97 64.52 1.56 0.40 0.33 1.22 100

BLCA 0 0.18 43.29 55.02 0.76 0.19 0.14 0.60 100

CANY 12 0.71 45.91 51.40 1.15 0.29 0.35 0.89 100

CARE 5 0.36 35.24 62.30 1.07 0.27 0.27 0.85 100

GRCA 2 0.17 40.04 57.31 1.17 0.30 0.24 0.95 100

GRSA 0 0.10 80.73 11.94 3.37 0.86 0.46 2.64 100

LAGA 0 0.13 47.62 49.82 1.14 0.29 0.22 0.92 100

MABE 0 0.08 76.05 19.20 2.11 0.54 0.42 1.68 100

MEVE 21 0.95 34.45 62.50 1.30 0.33 0.41 1.01 100

PECO 0 0.15 49.98 46.26 1.68 0.43 0.33 1.32 100

PEFO 1 0.14 89.14 6.88 1.74 0.44 0.42 1.38 100

SAPE 3 0.28 32.25 62.65 2.24 0.57 0.56 1.73 100

WEEL 0 0.14 42.33 53.57 1.84 0.47 0.34 1.45 100

WEMI 1 0.19 26.55 65.61 3.37 0.86 0.98 2.61 100

WHPE 0 0.13 47.00 49.86 1.42 0.36 0.24 1.11 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 138 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 11 0.68 24.06 72.39 0.91 0.55 0.63 1.46 100

BAND 7 0.49 50.26 40.84 2.33 1.41 1.50 3.66 100

BLCA 4 0.37 19.24 76.63 0.99 0.60 0.99 1.55 100

CANY 16 0.84 30.14 66.46 0.85 0.51 0.67 1.36 100

CARE 4 0.23 29.36 68.45 0.54 0.33 0.45 0.87 100

GRCA 1 0.21 42.87 54.86 0.58 0.35 0.37 0.97 100

GRSA 0 0.20 27.46 69.95 0.68 0.41 0.39 1.10 100

LAGA 0 0.28 23.68 72.69 0.93 0.56 0.66 1.48 100

MABE 0 0.16 27.20 65.28 2.09 1.27 0.76 3.40 100

MEVE 73 1.79 37.50 56.98 1.29 0.78 1.40 2.05 100

PECO 3 0.31 38.08 53.60 2.22 1.34 1.25 3.51 100

PEFO 2 0.16 28.11 69.15 0.71 0.43 0.44 1.17 100

SAPE 27 0.73 26.46 67.64 1.45 0.88 1.29 2.29 100

WEEL 1 0.28 23.98 70.42 1.36 0.82 1.31 2.11 100

WEMI 9 0.54 43.96 46.81 2.18 1.32 2.34 3.39 100

WHPE 0 0.25 30.07 67.71 0.57 0.35 0.39 0.92 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.54 23.97 72.89 1.37 0.35 0.35 1.07 100

BAND 4 0.40 31.04 66.80 0.95 0.24 0.22 0.75 100

BLCA 1 0.29 25.16 72.63 0.98 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

CANY 13 0.65 23.43 73.82 1.20 0.31 0.31 0.94 100

CARE 3 0.18 31.45 66.94 0.71 0.18 0.15 0.57 100

GRCA 1 0.16 43.73 54.87 0.62 0.16 0.11 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.14 27.52 70.87 0.72 0.19 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 0 0.21 25.77 71.45 1.20 0.31 0.33 0.94 100

MABE 0 0.12 26.89 71.16 0.87 0.22 0.16 0.69 100

MEVE 52 1.40 60.18 31.05 3.70 0.95 1.26 2.86 100

PECO 3 0.24 40.91 57.63 0.65 0.17 0.13 0.52 100

PEFO 0 0.13 28.41 69.90 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.62 100

SAPE 16 0.59 26.83 69.85 1.45 0.37 0.35 1.14 100

WEEL 0 0.20 24.64 72.13 1.40 0.36 0.38 1.09 100

WEMI 6 0.43 24.32 73.64 0.90 0.23 0.19 0.72 100

WHPE 0 0.17 31.55 67.09 0.60 0.15 0.12 0.49 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 3 0.34 30.13 66.49 1.50 0.38 0.30 1.19 100

BAND 4 0.26 39.64 57.04 1.46 0.37 0.34 1.15 100

BLCA 0 0.17 22.92 73.13 1.71 0.44 0.47 1.33 100

CANY 5 0.40 29.29 67.11 1.55 0.40 0.44 1.21 100

CARE 0 0.12 41.89 55.66 1.08 0.28 0.23 0.88 100

GRCA 0 0.12 56.32 41.70 0.88 0.22 0.16 0.73 100

GRSA 0 0.11 90.27 5.82 1.77 0.45 0.29 1.41 100

LAGA 0 0.14 24.51 67.82 3.39 0.87 0.78 2.63 100

MABE 0 0.08 37.30 59.48 1.43 0.37 0.28 1.14 100

MEVE 27 0.99 32.02 64.36 1.54 0.39 0.49 1.20 100

PECO 0 0.17 53.03 44.87 0.93 0.24 0.18 0.75 100

PEFO 0 0.09 94.56 1.04 1.96 0.50 0.38 1.55 100

SAPE 6 0.38 55.39 39.06 2.46 0.63 0.56 1.90 100

WEEL 0 0.12 28.60 66.05 2.33 0.60 0.62 1.80 100

WEMI 0 0.29 51.19 40.96 3.37 0.86 1.01 2.61 100

WHPE 0 0.11 42.45 55.47 0.92 0.24 0.18 0.74 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 139 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 1

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.60 28.75 65.62 1.35 0.81 1.33 2.14 100

BAND 8 0.54 22.07 72.47 1.34 0.81 1.23 2.09 100

BLCA 2 0.38 34.19 62.97 0.72 0.43 0.54 1.15 100

CANY 14 0.71 29.97 59.10 2.54 1.54 2.91 3.94 100

CARE 3 0.32 86.40 1.13 3.02 1.83 2.88 4.74 100

GRCA 0 0.16 51.56 42.85 1.42 0.86 1.00 2.30 100

GRSA 1 0.17 19.79 77.41 0.69 0.42 0.59 1.10 100

LAGA 2 0.29 36.29 60.25 0.89 0.54 0.59 1.44 100

MABE 0 0.16 31.87 65.36 0.70 0.42 0.53 1.12 100

MEVE 60 1.67 38.31 45.74 3.66 2.22 4.38 5.69 100

PECO 3 0.35 51.53 42.28 1.61 0.98 1.01 2.59 100

PEFO 0 0.14 31.20 64.81 1.05 0.64 0.58 1.73 100

SAPE 13 0.63 34.16 60.15 1.34 0.81 1.43 2.10 100

WEEL 0 0.25 23.83 70.37 1.42 0.86 1.27 2.25 100

WEMI 4 0.45 21.90 69.56 2.19 1.33 1.52 3.49 100

WHPE 1 0.26 22.07 72.11 1.47 0.89 1.11 2.34 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.52 29.53 67.07 1.47 0.38 0.40 1.16 100

BAND 3 0.37 23.82 72.96 1.41 0.36 0.36 1.10 100

BLCA 0 0.28 25.40 72.77 0.80 0.20 0.19 0.64 100

CANY 12 0.57 38.31 60.22 0.65 0.17 0.14 0.52 100

CARE 2 0.23 31.26 65.22 1.53 0.39 0.39 1.20 100

GRCA 0 0.12 52.37 44.18 1.52 0.39 0.31 1.22 100

GRSA 1 0.14 27.01 70.46 1.12 0.29 0.22 0.89 100

LAGA 0 0.21 20.74 75.52 1.71 0.44 0.17 1.41 100

MABE 0 0.11 33.14 63.55 1.53 0.39 0.19 1.20 100

MEVE 48 1.27 41.93 48.61 4.01 1.03 1.33 3.10 100

PECO 1 0.27 46.70 51.27 0.91 0.23 0.15 0.73 100

PEFO 0 0.11 31.59 65.92 1.12 0.29 0.18 0.91 100

SAPE 7 0.50 26.74 68.42 2.08 0.53 0.62 1.61 100

WEEL 0 0.20 20.88 76.49 1.15 0.30 0.29 0.90 100

WEMI 3 0.35 45.71 42.80 4.96 1.27 1.43 3.84 100

WHPE 0 0.20 22.74 73.74 1.56 0.40 0.34 1.23 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 4 0.38 62.01 35.59 1.06 0.27 0.23 0.85 100

BAND 0 0.23 27.23 67.40 2.35 0.60 0.59 1.82 100

BLCA 0 0.18 33.69 63.38 1.28 0.33 0.29 1.03 100

CANY 6 0.40 52.43 43.07 1.96 0.50 0.47 1.57 100

CARE 2 0.20 94.02 0.95 2.20 0.56 0.52 1.75 100

GRCA 0 0.10 37.65 58.16 1.86 0.48 0.36 1.50 100

GRSA 0 0.09 57.96 38.20 1.71 0.44 0.36 1.35 100

LAGA 0 0.14 44.34 51.98 1.61 0.41 0.39 1.26 100

MABE 0 0.07 44.41 53.11 1.09 0.28 0.25 0.87 100

MEVE 31 0.87 26.61 68.33 2.16 0.55 0.65 1.70 100

PECO 1 0.19 62.60 31.88 2.47 0.63 0.45 1.97 100

PEFO 0 0.09 79.92 15.43 2.07 0.53 0.36 1.68 100

SAPE 2 0.33 25.36 66.84 3.37 0.86 0.96 2.60 100

WEEL 0 0.13 26.96 67.15 2.57 0.66 0.64 2.02 100

WEMI 1 0.22 23.18 66.45 4.49 1.15 1.23 3.50 100

WHPE 0 0.15 46.41 51.36 0.98 0.25 0.21 0.79 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 140 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 16 0.83 25.00 69.90 1.28 0.78 1.04 2.02 100

BAND 1 0.32 25.12 71.09 1.01 0.61 0.61 1.57 100

BLCA 3 0.36 23.37 71.60 1.28 0.78 0.99 1.98 100

CANY 27 1.07 40.57 55.69 0.86 0.53 1.00 1.35 100

CARE 12 0.78 25.24 72.22 0.62 0.38 0.56 0.99 100

GRCA 5 0.31 29.84 67.36 0.71 0.43 0.51 1.15 100

GRSA 0 0.19 32.82 57.23 2.66 1.62 1.52 4.16 100

LAGA 0 0.26 34.98 62.29 0.71 0.43 0.46 1.14 100

MABE 0 0.18 19.11 76.53 1.10 0.67 0.86 1.73 100

MEVE 56 1.49 45.92 37.44 3.81 2.32 4.60 5.92 100

PECO 2 0.29 84.16 9.33 1.63 0.99 1.33 2.56 100

PEFO 2 0.25 23.63 72.55 0.97 0.59 0.72 1.54 100

SAPE 11 0.63 25.41 69.31 1.29 0.79 1.19 2.01 100

WEEL 1 0.27 30.10 67.99 0.51 0.31 0.29 0.80 100

WEMI 3 0.38 31.78 59.74 2.05 1.25 1.98 3.19 100

WHPE 2 0.24 26.23 70.99 0.74 0.45 0.42 1.17 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.69 25.31 71.71 1.31 0.34 0.31 1.02 100

BAND 1 0.23 43.57 53.42 1.34 0.34 0.29 1.03 100

BLCA 2 0.28 23.45 74.26 1.00 0.26 0.26 0.77 100

CANY 22 0.99 38.13 59.58 1.01 0.26 0.23 0.80 100

CARE 10 0.57 26.92 71.52 0.68 0.17 0.17 0.53 100

GRCA 4 0.27 30.84 67.43 0.76 0.20 0.15 0.61 100

GRSA 0 0.14 21.45 76.75 0.80 0.21 0.17 0.62 100

LAGA 0 0.19 28.87 69.14 0.89 0.23 0.16 0.70 100

MABE 0 0.14 20.45 75.64 1.74 0.44 0.40 1.33 100

MEVE 38 1.35 35.54 59.78 2.00 0.51 0.63 1.53 100

PECO 1 0.23 25.62 70.23 1.83 0.47 0.44 1.40 100

PEFO 2 0.19 25.42 72.18 1.07 0.27 0.23 0.83 100

SAPE 7 0.44 27.35 69.47 1.40 0.36 0.35 1.07 100

WEEL 0 0.22 33.65 63.72 1.18 0.30 0.22 0.92 100

WEMI 2 0.31 30.63 61.38 3.50 0.90 0.91 2.69 100

WHPE 2 0.18 28.38 69.83 0.82 0.21 0.13 0.64 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 5 0.44 40.18 57.32 1.11 0.28 0.24 0.88 100

BAND 0 0.16 31.97 64.51 1.57 0.40 0.33 1.21 100

BLCA 0 0.18 43.29 55.02 0.76 0.19 0.14 0.59 100

CANY 12 0.71 45.90 51.41 1.15 0.29 0.35 0.89 100

CARE 5 0.36 35.24 62.30 1.07 0.27 0.28 0.84 100

GRCA 2 0.17 40.04 57.30 1.17 0.30 0.24 0.94 100

GRSA 0 0.10 80.73 11.93 3.38 0.87 0.46 2.63 100

LAGA 0 0.13 47.62 49.81 1.15 0.29 0.22 0.91 100

MABE 0 0.08 76.05 19.19 2.12 0.54 0.42 1.67 100

MEVE 21 0.94 34.44 62.50 1.31 0.33 0.41 1.01 100

PECO 0 0.15 49.98 46.25 1.69 0.43 0.33 1.32 100

PEFO 1 0.14 89.13 6.88 1.75 0.45 0.42 1.37 100

SAPE 3 0.27 32.24 62.65 2.25 0.58 0.56 1.72 100

WEEL 0 0.14 42.33 53.56 1.85 0.47 0.35 1.45 100

WEMI 1 0.19 26.55 65.61 3.39 0.87 0.98 2.60 100

WHPE 0 0.13 47.00 49.86 1.43 0.37 0.24 1.11 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 141 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 11 0.64 26.15 67.85 1.45 0.89 1.39 2.27 100

BAND 7 0.50 48.55 42.63 2.30 1.40 1.49 3.62 100

BLCA 4 0.37 18.38 77.59 0.97 0.59 0.97 1.51 100

CANY 15 0.83 28.77 67.90 0.83 0.51 0.66 1.33 100

CARE 4 0.23 27.98 69.89 0.53 0.32 0.44 0.85 100

GRCA 1 0.20 40.86 56.90 0.57 0.35 0.37 0.95 100

GRSA 0 0.21 26.11 71.35 0.67 0.41 0.39 1.08 100

LAGA 0 0.29 22.65 73.82 0.90 0.55 0.64 1.44 100

MABE 0 0.16 26.26 66.39 2.05 1.25 0.74 3.32 100

MEVE 72 1.82 36.41 58.08 1.29 0.79 1.39 2.04 100

PECO 3 0.31 36.65 55.19 2.17 1.32 1.23 3.43 100

PEFO 2 0.16 26.72 70.61 0.69 0.42 0.43 1.13 100

SAPE 28 0.73 25.48 68.66 1.43 0.87 1.28 2.26 100

WEEL 1 0.29 22.95 71.57 1.32 0.81 1.29 2.06 100

WEMI 9 0.56 18.60 76.08 1.26 0.77 1.32 1.97 100

WHPE 0 0.26 28.49 69.36 0.55 0.33 0.38 0.89 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.54 23.96 72.89 1.38 0.35 0.35 1.07 100

BAND 4 0.40 31.03 66.81 0.95 0.24 0.22 0.74 100

BLCA 1 0.29 25.16 72.63 0.98 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

CANY 13 0.65 23.42 73.82 1.20 0.31 0.31 0.93 100

CARE 3 0.18 31.45 66.94 0.71 0.18 0.15 0.57 100

GRCA 1 0.16 43.73 54.87 0.62 0.16 0.11 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.14 27.52 70.87 0.73 0.19 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 0 0.21 25.77 71.45 1.21 0.31 0.33 0.93 100

MABE 0 0.11 26.89 71.16 0.88 0.22 0.16 0.69 100

MEVE 52 1.40 60.02 31.23 3.71 0.95 1.25 2.84 100

PECO 3 0.24 40.91 57.63 0.65 0.17 0.13 0.52 100

PEFO 0 0.13 28.41 69.90 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.61 100

SAPE 16 0.58 26.82 69.85 1.46 0.37 0.35 1.14 100

WEEL 0 0.20 24.64 72.13 1.41 0.36 0.38 1.08 100

WEMI 6 0.42 24.31 73.65 0.91 0.23 0.19 0.72 100

WHPE 0 0.17 31.55 67.09 0.61 0.16 0.12 0.48 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 3 0.34 30.13 66.49 1.51 0.39 0.30 1.19 100

BAND 4 0.26 39.63 57.04 1.47 0.38 0.34 1.15 100

BLCA 0 0.17 22.92 73.13 1.72 0.44 0.47 1.32 100

CANY 5 0.40 29.28 67.11 1.56 0.40 0.44 1.21 100

CARE 0 0.12 41.89 55.65 1.08 0.28 0.23 0.87 100

GRCA 0 0.11 56.32 41.69 0.88 0.23 0.16 0.72 100

GRSA 0 0.11 90.26 5.82 1.78 0.46 0.29 1.40 100

LAGA 0 0.14 31.23 64.21 1.99 0.51 0.54 1.53 100

MABE 0 0.08 37.30 59.48 1.44 0.37 0.28 1.14 100

MEVE 27 0.99 32.01 64.37 1.55 0.40 0.49 1.20 100

PECO 0 0.17 53.03 44.86 0.94 0.24 0.18 0.74 100

PEFO 0 0.09 94.55 1.04 1.97 0.51 0.38 1.55 100

SAPE 6 0.38 55.34 39.10 2.47 0.63 0.56 1.89 100

WEEL 0 0.12 28.60 66.05 2.34 0.60 0.62 1.79 100

WEMI 0 0.28 51.18 40.96 3.39 0.87 1.01 2.59 100

WHPE 0 0.11 42.45 55.47 0.92 0.24 0.18 0.73 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 142 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 2

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.58 26.09 65.91 1.91 1.16 1.95 2.97 100

BAND 8 0.54 21.18 73.48 1.31 0.80 1.19 2.04 100

BLCA 3 0.39 31.74 65.45 0.70 0.43 0.55 1.12 100

CANY 13 0.72 29.11 60.16 2.49 1.52 2.85 3.87 100

CARE 3 0.31 86.04 1.21 3.09 1.88 2.94 4.84 100

GRCA 0 0.16 49.96 44.45 1.42 0.86 1.00 2.29 100

GRSA 1 0.17 25.45 72.07 0.69 0.42 0.28 1.09 100

LAGA 1 0.29 19.38 74.87 1.61 0.98 0.49 2.66 100

MABE 0 0.16 31.67 65.36 0.73 0.45 0.63 1.16 100

MEVE 60 1.66 38.26 45.78 3.66 2.23 4.39 5.68 100

PECO 3 0.36 20.30 74.98 1.21 0.74 0.82 1.96 100

PEFO 0 0.14 69.40 24.51 1.58 0.96 0.97 2.58 100

SAPE 13 0.64 24.73 67.13 1.92 1.17 2.07 2.99 100

WEEL 0 0.26 22.86 71.46 1.39 0.85 1.25 2.20 100

WEMI 4 0.44 37.67 57.85 1.06 0.65 1.12 1.65 100

WHPE 1 0.26 32.19 65.39 0.61 0.37 0.45 0.98 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.52 29.52 67.08 1.47 0.38 0.40 1.15 100

BAND 3 0.37 23.81 72.96 1.42 0.36 0.36 1.09 100

BLCA 0 0.28 25.40 72.77 0.80 0.21 0.19 0.64 100

CANY 12 0.57 38.31 60.22 0.65 0.17 0.14 0.52 100

CARE 2 0.23 31.25 65.23 1.54 0.39 0.39 1.20 100

GRCA 0 0.12 52.36 44.18 1.53 0.39 0.31 1.22 100

GRSA 1 0.14 27.01 70.46 1.13 0.29 0.22 0.89 100

LAGA 0 0.21 20.74 75.52 1.72 0.44 0.17 1.40 100

MABE 0 0.11 33.14 63.55 1.54 0.39 0.19 1.19 100

MEVE 48 1.26 41.89 48.65 4.03 1.03 1.33 3.08 100

PECO 1 0.27 46.68 51.28 0.92 0.24 0.15 0.73 100

PEFO 0 0.11 72.61 23.59 1.70 0.44 0.30 1.37 100

SAPE 7 0.50 26.73 68.43 2.09 0.53 0.62 1.60 100

WEEL 0 0.20 20.87 76.49 1.16 0.30 0.29 0.89 100

WEMI 3 0.35 45.70 42.79 4.98 1.28 1.43 3.82 100

WHPE 0 0.20 22.74 73.73 1.56 0.40 0.34 1.22 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 4 0.37 62.00 35.59 1.06 0.27 0.23 0.85 100

BAND 0 0.22 27.23 67.40 2.36 0.60 0.59 1.81 100

BLCA 0 0.17 33.69 63.38 1.29 0.33 0.29 1.02 100

CANY 6 0.40 52.42 43.08 1.97 0.50 0.47 1.56 100

CARE 2 0.19 94.01 0.95 2.22 0.57 0.52 1.74 100

GRCA 0 0.10 37.65 58.16 1.87 0.48 0.36 1.49 100

GRSA 0 0.09 57.96 38.19 1.72 0.44 0.36 1.34 100

LAGA 0 0.14 44.34 51.98 1.62 0.41 0.39 1.25 100

MABE 0 0.07 44.41 53.10 1.09 0.28 0.25 0.86 100

MEVE 31 0.86 26.61 68.32 2.18 0.56 0.65 1.69 100

PECO 1 0.19 62.60 31.88 2.48 0.63 0.45 1.96 100

PEFO 0 0.09 79.92 15.42 2.08 0.53 0.37 1.67 100

SAPE 1 0.33 25.36 66.84 3.38 0.87 0.97 2.59 100

WEEL 0 0.13 26.96 67.15 2.58 0.66 0.64 2.01 100

WEMI 1 0.21 23.18 66.44 4.51 1.15 1.23 3.48 100

WHPE 0 0.14 46.41 51.36 0.99 0.25 0.21 0.78 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 143 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 1.04 37.90 59.89 0.56 0.35 0.41 0.89 100

BAND 9 0.53 76.32 16.85 1.73 1.07 1.30 2.73 100

BLCA 10 0.58 27.65 66.71 1.42 0.87 1.14 2.21 100

CANY 35 1.44 35.63 61.86 0.63 0.39 0.48 1.02 100

CARE 17 1.10 29.96 67.35 0.65 0.40 0.61 1.03 100

GRCA 7 0.48 30.18 67.22 0.65 0.40 0.53 1.03 100

GRSA 1 0.28 76.24 15.49 2.27 1.39 1.03 3.58 100

LAGA 4 0.40 39.72 57.57 0.70 0.43 0.45 1.13 100

MABE 1 0.24 35.97 61.92 0.56 0.35 0.32 0.89 100

MEVE 100 1.92 53.68 38.69 1.83 1.12 1.82 2.86 100

PECO 6 0.48 51.34 44.27 1.13 0.69 0.80 1.77 100

PEFO 5 0.43 86.46 10.06 0.89 0.55 0.62 1.42 100

SAPE 31 0.88 30.39 63.58 1.46 0.90 1.41 2.26 100

WEEL 6 0.38 37.70 56.66 1.47 0.91 0.92 2.33 100

WEMI 9 0.59 26.83 67.21 1.46 0.90 1.33 2.28 100

WHPE 5 0.37 29.53 67.67 0.74 0.45 0.44 1.17 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 0.89 35.30 62.84 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.66 100

BAND 3 0.39 26.98 70.54 1.12 0.28 0.21 0.87 100

BLCA 4 0.44 25.68 71.04 1.46 0.37 0.33 1.12 100

CANY 29 1.15 32.46 66.00 0.68 0.17 0.15 0.54 100

CARE 14 0.86 26.87 71.56 0.68 0.17 0.18 0.54 100

GRCA 5 0.35 27.44 70.95 0.71 0.18 0.17 0.56 100

GRSA 0 0.21 36.16 57.33 2.97 0.75 0.50 2.30 100

LAGA 1 0.29 25.67 70.62 1.64 0.42 0.37 1.27 100

MABE 0 0.20 33.23 64.11 1.21 0.30 0.21 0.95 100

MEVE 64 1.56 52.43 37.30 4.36 1.10 1.46 3.35 100

PECO 3 0.35 87.02 9.06 1.73 0.44 0.41 1.34 100

PEFO 2 0.29 85.92 11.67 1.07 0.27 0.21 0.85 100

SAPE 18 0.70 27.84 68.80 1.47 0.37 0.39 1.13 100

WEEL 4 0.30 34.05 62.90 1.38 0.35 0.24 1.08 100

WEMI 6 0.44 21.26 75.66 1.32 0.33 0.40 1.03 100

WHPE 2 0.28 27.58 70.65 0.80 0.20 0.14 0.63 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.67 40.21 57.22 1.14 0.29 0.24 0.91 100

BAND 1 0.26 88.18 6.47 2.37 0.60 0.53 1.85 100

BLCA 2 0.28 43.38 54.93 0.76 0.19 0.14 0.60 100

CANY 21 0.85 45.95 51.43 1.16 0.29 0.25 0.92 100

CARE 9 0.56 34.63 62.92 1.07 0.27 0.28 0.84 100

GRCA 2 0.23 41.46 55.85 1.19 0.30 0.25 0.95 100

GRSA 0 0.15 80.79 11.89 3.38 0.85 0.46 2.63 100

LAGA 0 0.21 37.63 57.87 2.03 0.51 0.38 1.57 100

MABE 0 0.13 75.75 19.48 2.13 0.54 0.42 1.69 100

MEVE 35 1.13 29.14 64.57 2.70 0.68 0.84 2.07 100

PECO 2 0.24 53.12 42.90 1.80 0.45 0.32 1.40 100

PEFO 2 0.22 89.13 6.93 1.73 0.44 0.42 1.36 100

SAPE 7 0.46 31.04 63.80 2.25 0.57 0.60 1.73 100

WEEL 0 0.20 41.78 53.38 2.19 0.55 0.38 1.72 100

WEMI 2 0.29 48.79 48.01 1.45 0.37 0.26 1.13 100

WHPE 2 0.19 80.33 12.92 3.03 0.77 0.58 2.37 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 144 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 15 0.81 31.17 63.37 1.30 0.80 1.33 2.03 100

BAND 20 0.81 28.33 63.99 1.89 1.16 1.69 2.94 100

BLCA 9 0.53 21.84 73.75 1.06 0.65 1.04 1.65 100

CANY 22 1.04 23.62 71.52 1.13 0.70 1.26 1.76 100

CARE 5 0.38 34.41 62.98 0.66 0.40 0.48 1.07 100

GRCA 3 0.33 45.95 51.86 0.55 0.34 0.36 0.92 100

GRSA 3 0.33 82.46 13.08 1.16 0.71 0.76 1.83 100

LAGA 5 0.44 25.09 67.37 1.91 1.17 1.50 2.97 100

MABE 0 0.25 28.79 63.57 2.12 1.30 0.81 3.42 100

MEVE 95 2.18 50.54 42.30 1.67 1.03 1.84 2.63 100

PECO 8 0.52 43.31 54.53 0.56 0.34 0.37 0.89 100

PEFO 5 0.25 91.13 1.98 1.75 1.08 1.27 2.80 100

SAPE 43 1.03 34.16 58.88 1.69 1.04 1.59 2.64 100

WEEL 5 0.42 34.33 58.68 1.81 1.11 1.22 2.86 100

WEMI 23 0.82 31.35 66.25 0.58 0.36 0.54 0.92 100

WHPE 3 0.39 33.90 60.27 1.53 0.94 0.95 2.41 100

Baseline - Consent Decree 

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 12 0.65 29.26 66.96 1.65 0.42 0.45 1.27 100

BAND 10 0.57 52.51 41.86 2.54 0.64 0.47 1.97 100

BLCA 5 0.41 28.10 70.16 0.78 0.20 0.14 0.62 100

CANY 17 0.85 30.97 66.94 0.92 0.23 0.21 0.73 100

CARE 5 0.26 91.08 1.83 3.13 0.79 0.70 2.47 100

GRCA 3 0.24 42.65 55.95 0.62 0.16 0.12 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.24 27.92 70.46 0.73 0.18 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 1 0.33 22.49 73.90 1.64 0.41 0.29 1.26 100

MABE 0 0.18 27.59 70.65 0.80 0.20 0.13 0.63 100

MEVE 76 1.90 42.51 53.81 1.58 0.40 0.48 1.23 100

PECO 5 0.36 30.99 66.44 1.17 0.30 0.18 0.91 100

PEFO 3 0.18 28.46 69.86 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.61 100

SAPE 34 0.81 28.26 67.95 1.66 0.42 0.43 1.29 100

WEEL 4 0.33 32.22 63.43 1.95 0.49 0.38 1.52 100

WEMI 16 0.64 31.41 61.73 2.93 0.74 0.94 2.25 100

WHPE 0 0.31 44.36 54.39 0.55 0.14 0.11 0.44 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 4 0.42 40.35 56.81 1.25 0.32 0.28 1.00 100

BAND 4 0.39 58.60 33.24 3.69 0.93 0.68 2.86 100

BLCA 2 0.26 37.61 59.65 1.23 0.31 0.22 0.97 100

CANY 9 0.56 38.75 58.07 1.40 0.35 0.31 1.11 100

CARE 3 0.19 42.02 55.52 1.08 0.27 0.23 0.87 100

GRCA 1 0.18 92.20 1.53 2.81 0.71 0.56 2.19 100

GRSA 0 0.18 90.09 5.99 1.78 0.45 0.29 1.40 100

LAGA 0 0.21 25.06 67.26 3.42 0.86 0.78 2.63 100

MABE 0 0.12 40.10 54.02 2.65 0.67 0.47 2.08 100

MEVE 50 1.31 42.33 53.64 1.73 0.44 0.51 1.35 100

PECO 3 0.24 52.38 45.58 0.91 0.23 0.18 0.72 100

PEFO 0 0.14 37.00 59.48 1.58 0.40 0.26 1.29 100

SAPE 10 0.56 59.05 35.08 2.60 0.66 0.61 2.00 100

WEEL 0 0.21 36.58 60.66 1.25 0.32 0.21 0.99 100

WEMI 3 0.41 22.76 71.73 2.37 0.60 0.71 1.83 100

WHPE 0 0.22 39.87 58.02 0.94 0.24 0.18 0.74 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 145 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 3

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.72 30.15 61.20 2.06 1.26 2.13 3.19 100

BAND 15 0.71 23.24 69.03 1.92 1.18 1.63 2.99 100

BLCA 9 0.59 23.67 72.71 0.88 0.54 0.82 1.38 100

CANY 19 0.96 32.66 55.96 2.65 1.63 2.99 4.11 100

CARE 9 0.52 48.88 48.12 0.75 0.46 0.56 1.23 100

GRCA 3 0.26 91.93 1.11 1.76 1.08 1.29 2.83 100

GRSA 3 0.27 49.52 46.33 1.06 0.65 0.76 1.68 100

LAGA 5 0.43 22.09 71.73 1.75 1.07 0.58 2.78 100

MABE 0 0.25 27.57 67.94 1.12 0.69 0.91 1.76 100

MEVE 92 2.14 70.75 6.38 5.19 3.19 6.44 8.05 100

PECO 12 0.58 54.64 39.46 1.53 0.94 0.97 2.45 100

PEFO 1 0.24 88.09 6.50 1.41 0.87 0.86 2.28 100

SAPE 34 0.88 39.44 54.36 1.46 0.90 1.58 2.27 100

WEEL 4 0.38 22.78 73.96 0.83 0.51 0.60 1.31 100

WEMI 15 0.65 30.94 64.97 1.04 0.64 0.76 1.65 100

WHPE 4 0.37 24.02 69.82 1.56 0.96 1.20 2.46 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.66 29.12 65.81 2.19 0.55 0.65 1.68 100

BAND 8 0.61 31.91 64.13 1.75 0.44 0.40 1.36 100

BLCA 7 0.46 33.18 65.04 0.79 0.20 0.18 0.62 100

CANY 14 0.79 32.64 60.84 2.79 0.70 0.88 2.14 100

CARE 4 0.36 91.10 1.19 3.36 0.85 0.90 2.60 100

GRCA 0 0.19 52.76 43.76 1.54 0.39 0.32 1.23 100

GRSA 1 0.21 23.53 72.94 1.57 0.40 0.34 1.22 100

LAGA 3 0.33 21.25 74.88 1.79 0.45 0.16 1.47 100

MABE 0 0.18 22.58 74.94 1.09 0.27 0.27 0.85 100

MEVE 64 1.74 43.30 46.82 4.20 1.06 1.40 3.22 100

PECO 5 0.42 34.27 62.29 1.50 0.38 0.39 1.16 100

PEFO 1 0.17 72.31 23.90 1.69 0.43 0.30 1.36 100

SAPE 18 0.72 27.03 68.03 2.14 0.54 0.62 1.64 100

WEEL 2 0.35 23.08 74.48 1.07 0.27 0.28 0.83 100

WEMI 7 0.50 30.19 67.61 0.97 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

WHPE 2 0.28 90.86 5.64 1.60 0.40 0.26 1.24 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 7 0.41 29.77 61.89 3.60 0.91 1.06 2.77 100

BAND 2 0.38 25.60 68.91 2.40 0.61 0.62 1.85 100

BLCA 0 0.30 43.38 53.90 1.20 0.30 0.27 0.94 100

CANY 9 0.56 49.82 48.02 0.95 0.24 0.21 0.76 100

CARE 2 0.27 57.22 40.06 1.19 0.30 0.25 0.97 100

GRCA 0 0.16 60.14 36.71 1.40 0.35 0.29 1.12 100

GRSA 1 0.14 57.89 38.26 1.72 0.43 0.35 1.34 100

LAGA 0 0.22 46.95 49.82 1.45 0.37 0.27 1.15 100

MABE 0 0.11 44.31 52.96 1.19 0.30 0.30 0.93 100

MEVE 44 1.19 35.84 48.98 6.45 1.63 2.15 4.95 100

PECO 1 0.29 61.89 32.63 2.46 0.62 0.45 1.95 100

PEFO 0 0.14 79.72 15.64 2.08 0.52 0.37 1.67 100

SAPE 6 0.47 35.58 58.79 2.42 0.61 0.73 1.87 100

WEEL 0 0.21 26.31 70.28 1.52 0.38 0.32 1.18 100

WEMI 2 0.30 36.44 59.57 1.78 0.45 0.37 1.39 100

WHPE 0 0.19 53.40 44.14 1.12 0.28 0.16 0.89 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 146 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 1.05 38.73 59.14 0.54 0.33 0.40 0.86 100

BAND 9 0.54 77.25 16.22 1.66 1.02 1.24 2.61 100

BLCA 10 0.58 27.97 66.50 1.39 0.86 1.12 2.16 100

CANY 35 1.47 36.32 61.24 0.61 0.38 0.47 0.99 100

CARE 18 1.11 30.71 66.66 0.64 0.39 0.59 1.01 100

GRCA 7 0.48 31.01 66.45 0.63 0.39 0.51 1.00 100

GRSA 1 0.29 76.95 15.10 2.18 1.34 1.00 3.43 100

LAGA 4 0.40 40.66 56.73 0.68 0.42 0.44 1.09 100

MABE 1 0.24 69.36 25.32 1.36 0.84 0.94 2.18 100

MEVE 97 1.94 55.06 37.27 1.83 1.13 1.84 2.87 100

PECO 6 0.48 32.92 63.69 0.95 0.58 0.38 1.49 100

PEFO 5 0.44 29.28 67.84 0.68 0.42 0.71 1.07 100

SAPE 33 0.89 31.06 63.04 1.43 0.88 1.38 2.22 100

WEEL 6 0.38 38.50 56.07 1.42 0.88 0.88 2.25 100

WEMI 10 0.59 27.20 66.98 1.42 0.88 1.30 2.23 100

WHPE 5 0.37 30.24 67.03 0.72 0.44 0.43 1.14 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 18 0.88 35.06 63.08 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.66 100

BAND 3 0.38 26.97 70.54 1.12 0.29 0.20 0.87 100

BLCA 4 0.42 25.63 71.10 1.45 0.37 0.33 1.12 100

CANY 29 1.14 32.53 65.94 0.68 0.17 0.15 0.54 100

CARE 13 0.86 26.89 71.54 0.68 0.18 0.18 0.54 100

GRCA 5 0.36 27.72 70.68 0.70 0.18 0.16 0.55 100

GRSA 0 0.21 36.09 57.39 2.96 0.76 0.50 2.30 100

LAGA 1 0.28 36.17 62.10 0.77 0.20 0.14 0.61 100

MABE 0 0.20 33.07 64.29 1.19 0.31 0.21 0.94 100

MEVE 64 1.55 71.87 17.66 4.45 1.15 1.45 3.43 100

PECO 2 0.34 87.02 9.05 1.73 0.45 0.41 1.35 100

PEFO 2 0.29 85.93 11.66 1.07 0.28 0.21 0.85 100

SAPE 18 0.69 27.73 68.93 1.46 0.38 0.39 1.12 100

WEEL 4 0.30 33.81 63.19 1.36 0.35 0.23 1.07 100

WEMI 6 0.43 21.27 75.64 1.32 0.34 0.40 1.03 100

WHPE 2 0.28 27.76 70.47 0.80 0.21 0.13 0.63 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.65 33.66 62.50 1.71 0.44 0.30 1.39 100

BAND 1 0.26 88.19 6.46 2.36 0.61 0.53 1.85 100

BLCA 2 0.27 43.40 54.90 0.76 0.20 0.14 0.60 100

CANY 21 0.87 46.18 51.19 1.16 0.30 0.25 0.92 100

CARE 9 0.56 34.84 62.71 1.06 0.27 0.28 0.84 100

GRCA 2 0.22 36.68 60.79 1.11 0.29 0.26 0.87 100

GRSA 0 0.15 80.78 11.88 3.37 0.87 0.46 2.64 100

LAGA 0 0.21 37.34 58.11 2.04 0.53 0.38 1.59 100

MABE 0 0.12 41.90 53.92 1.88 0.49 0.33 1.48 100

MEVE 35 1.15 29.00 64.69 2.70 0.69 0.84 2.08 100

PECO 2 0.24 53.02 42.99 1.80 0.46 0.32 1.40 100

PEFO 1 0.22 89.13 6.92 1.72 0.44 0.42 1.36 100

SAPE 7 0.46 31.03 63.81 2.25 0.58 0.60 1.73 100

WEEL 0 0.19 41.63 53.55 2.18 0.56 0.38 1.71 100

WEMI 2 0.29 48.61 48.20 1.44 0.37 0.26 1.12 100

WHPE 2 0.18 80.32 12.92 3.03 0.78 0.58 2.37 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 147 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 15 0.84 33.46 63.61 0.73 0.45 0.58 1.17 100

BAND 20 0.81 53.16 38.54 2.16 1.33 1.41 3.39 100

BLCA 10 0.54 22.21 73.48 1.04 0.64 1.01 1.62 100

CANY 22 1.06 24.09 71.18 1.10 0.68 1.23 1.72 100

CARE 5 0.38 35.19 62.28 0.64 0.39 0.47 1.04 100

GRCA 3 0.34 47.06 50.82 0.54 0.33 0.35 0.90 100

GRSA 2 0.34 83.04 12.72 1.10 0.68 0.71 1.74 100

LAGA 4 0.45 81.97 13.16 1.28 0.79 0.74 2.05 100

MABE 0 0.25 28.95 63.55 2.07 1.28 0.79 3.36 100

MEVE 96 2.18 51.65 41.36 1.63 1.00 1.80 2.56 100

PECO 8 0.52 44.34 53.57 0.54 0.33 0.36 0.86 100

PEFO 5 0.27 91.57 1.90 1.66 1.02 1.20 2.65 100

SAPE 43 1.04 34.95 58.17 1.67 1.03 1.57 2.61 100

WEEL 5 0.43 35.21 57.78 1.81 1.12 1.23 2.86 100

WEMI 25 0.81 32.08 65.59 0.56 0.35 0.53 0.90 100

WHPE 4 0.41 34.54 59.79 1.49 0.92 0.93 2.35 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 12 0.65 29.14 67.09 1.64 0.42 0.45 1.27 100

BAND 10 0.56 52.56 41.80 2.54 0.65 0.47 1.98 100

BLCA 4 0.42 20.20 77.31 1.08 0.28 0.30 0.83 100

CANY 17 0.85 30.88 67.04 0.92 0.24 0.20 0.73 100

CARE 5 0.26 91.06 1.83 3.12 0.81 0.70 2.47 100

GRCA 3 0.24 42.57 56.03 0.62 0.16 0.12 0.51 100

GRSA 0 0.23 28.00 70.38 0.73 0.19 0.12 0.58 100

LAGA 1 0.32 22.47 73.91 1.64 0.42 0.29 1.27 100

MABE 0 0.19 28.63 66.47 2.26 0.58 0.24 1.82 100

MEVE 75 1.89 42.10 54.26 1.56 0.40 0.47 1.22 100

PECO 5 0.35 30.81 66.63 1.17 0.30 0.18 0.91 100

PEFO 3 0.18 28.47 69.84 0.75 0.19 0.13 0.61 100

SAPE 34 0.80 28.16 68.06 1.65 0.42 0.42 1.29 100

WEEL 4 0.33 24.93 71.68 1.47 0.38 0.41 1.13 100

WEMI 13 0.63 31.35 61.78 2.92 0.75 0.93 2.26 100

WHPE 0 0.30 44.20 54.55 0.55 0.14 0.11 0.44 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 3 0.41 40.44 56.72 1.24 0.32 0.28 1.00 100

BAND 4 0.39 38.79 57.71 1.54 0.40 0.35 1.21 100

BLCA 2 0.26 39.93 57.31 1.24 0.32 0.20 0.99 100

CANY 9 0.57 38.74 58.08 1.40 0.36 0.31 1.11 100

CARE 3 0.18 42.10 55.43 1.08 0.28 0.23 0.88 100

GRCA 1 0.17 92.18 1.53 2.81 0.72 0.56 2.20 100

GRSA 0 0.17 90.06 6.00 1.78 0.46 0.29 1.41 100

LAGA 0 0.20 25.05 67.26 3.41 0.88 0.77 2.63 100

MABE 0 0.12 40.21 53.92 2.64 0.68 0.47 2.08 100

MEVE 49 1.29 41.74 54.25 1.72 0.44 0.51 1.34 100

PECO 3 0.24 52.44 45.51 0.91 0.24 0.18 0.73 100

PEFO 0 0.14 36.83 59.63 1.57 0.41 0.26 1.29 100

SAPE 10 0.55 58.71 35.43 2.59 0.67 0.61 2.00 100

WEEL 0 0.20 28.43 65.98 2.43 0.63 0.67 1.87 100

WEMI 2 0.40 22.67 71.81 2.37 0.61 0.71 1.83 100

WHPE 0 0.21 39.95 57.94 0.94 0.24 0.19 0.75 100
Attachment 6 – Results Tables Page 148 of 148 

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - Unit 4

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

Pre-Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 14 0.74 30.46 60.93 2.04 1.26 2.14 3.18 100

BAND 15 0.71 23.48 68.94 1.88 1.16 1.60 2.93 100

BLCA 9 0.59 37.08 55.34 1.83 1.13 1.78 2.84 100

CANY 20 0.97 32.92 55.93 2.59 1.60 2.93 4.03 100

CARE 9 0.53 49.90 47.20 0.72 0.45 0.54 1.19 100

GRCA 3 0.27 92.31 1.07 1.68 1.03 1.22 2.69 100

GRSA 3 0.27 24.99 69.23 1.46 0.90 1.12 2.30 100

LAGA 5 0.43 22.20 71.74 1.71 1.06 0.56 2.72 100

MABE 0 0.24 24.98 71.07 0.97 0.60 0.87 1.52 100

MEVE 93 2.15 71.14 6.46 5.08 3.13 6.31 7.88 100

PECO 12 0.59 55.50 38.80 1.48 0.91 0.94 2.37 100

PEFO 1 0.25 88.57 6.28 1.34 0.83 0.81 2.17 100

SAPE 35 0.88 28.38 62.72 2.09 1.29 2.27 3.25 100

WEEL 5 0.39 23.21 73.59 0.82 0.50 0.58 1.29 100

WEMI 15 0.65 31.61 64.42 1.01 0.63 0.73 1.61 100

WHPE 4 0.38 24.18 69.77 1.52 0.94 1.18 2.41 100

Baseline - Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 9 0.63 28.93 66.06 2.16 0.56 0.63 1.67 100

BAND 8 0.60 23.30 73.35 1.46 0.38 0.38 1.13 100

BLCA 7 0.44 33.38 64.83 0.79 0.20 0.18 0.62 100

CANY 13 0.78 32.54 60.94 2.78 0.72 0.88 2.14 100

CARE 4 0.35 91.08 1.19 3.35 0.86 0.90 2.61 100

GRCA 0 0.18 52.85 43.67 1.54 0.40 0.32 1.23 100

GRSA 1 0.21 23.53 72.93 1.57 0.41 0.34 1.23 100

LAGA 3 0.32 21.23 74.90 1.79 0.46 0.16 1.47 100

MABE 0 0.18 22.92 75.41 0.73 0.19 0.18 0.57 100

MEVE 63 1.73 44.56 45.24 4.32 1.11 1.44 3.33 100

PECO 5 0.41 52.81 43.33 1.73 0.45 0.31 1.38 100

PEFO 1 0.17 31.86 65.63 1.13 0.29 0.18 0.92 100

SAPE 17 0.69 26.79 68.32 2.10 0.54 0.62 1.62 100

WEEL 1 0.33 23.22 75.05 0.76 0.19 0.19 0.59 100

WEMI 6 0.49 30.25 67.54 0.97 0.25 0.20 0.78 100

WHPE 2 0.28 90.85 5.63 1.59 0.41 0.26 1.24 100

Hybrid with Inherent Controls and Sorbent Injection

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 7 0.39 29.71 62.08 3.54 0.91 1.03 2.73 100

BAND 2 0.37 25.57 68.93 2.40 0.62 0.62 1.86 100

BLCA 0 0.29 43.61 53.67 1.20 0.31 0.27 0.95 100

CANY 9 0.56 49.81 48.03 0.95 0.25 0.21 0.76 100

CARE 2 0.26 57.25 40.03 1.19 0.31 0.25 0.97 100

GRCA 0 0.15 60.21 36.63 1.39 0.36 0.29 1.12 100

GRSA 1 0.13 58.07 38.06 1.72 0.44 0.36 1.35 100

LAGA 0 0.21 47.49 49.34 1.42 0.37 0.25 1.14 100

MABE 0 0.11 44.47 52.79 1.19 0.31 0.30 0.94 100

MEVE 44 1.19 35.93 48.86 6.44 1.66 2.15 4.96 100

PECO 1 0.29 62.06 32.46 2.45 0.63 0.45 1.95 100

PEFO 0 0.14 79.71 15.64 2.07 0.53 0.37 1.68 100

SAPE 6 0.46 35.57 58.83 2.40 0.62 0.72 1.86 100

WEEL 0 0.21 26.06 70.50 1.53 0.39 0.32 1.19 100

WEMI 2 0.30 36.39 59.62 1.77 0.46 0.37 1.39 100

WHPE 0 0.19 91.14 3.30 2.50 0.64 0.47 1.95 100


02/09/11 1 

PNM San Juan Generating Station 

BART Analysis Update 

February 9, 2011 

I. Introduction 

The purpose of this Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Analysis Update 

for Public Service of New Mexico’s (PNM) San Juan Generating Station (SJGS) is to 

present additional information related to the nitrogen oxide (NOx) emission reductions 

achievable using selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR) technology. In addition to 

addressing new information available on SNCR technology, the cost calculations below 

are revised to express the calculations in fourth quarter 2010 dollars. 

 Because Step 1 and Step 2 of the BART analysis (i.e., identify available 

technologies and eliminate technically infeasible options) have already been completed 

with respect to SNCR, (see PNM BART Analysis dated June 6, 2007), and the additional 

information recently obtained does not affect the analysis previously provided under 

those steps, this analysis will only address Steps 3 – 5 of the BART Analysis for SNCR 

(i.e., emissions control effectiveness, impact analysis / cost effectiveness, and visibility 

analysis.) 

II. Previous Submittals 

PNM has previously submitted two documents addressing the capabilities of 

SNCR systems at SJGS. The first document, dated May 30, 2008, included a BART 

analysis for SNCR, which concluded that SNCR could achieve a NOx emission rate of 

0.24 lb/mmBtu. This emission rate was based on a quotation received from Fuel Tech, 

Inc. (Fuel Tech) the industry leader in experience with SNCR systems, particularly for 

units larger than 300 MW. The second document, dated August 29, 2008, included a 

BART analysis specifically for one type of SNCR technology offered by Mobotec known 

as “Rotamix.” In that document, PNM recognized that Mobotec claimed that its Rotamix 

technology would be capable of achieving a NOx emission rate of 0.23 lb/mmBtu. 

However, PNM expressed concerns about Mobotec’s experience with the Rotamix 

system at units larger than 300 MW. PNM is not aware of any new information that 

would address the concerns identified in the 2008 analysis of Mobotec’s Rotamix system. 
02/09/11 2 

III. Additional Information Regarding SNCR 

BART Analysis Step 3: Control Effectiveness

New developments have recently occurred in the SNCR market since PNM last 

evaluated SNCR in the context of the BART determination for SJGS. In January 2009, 

Fuel Tech purchased Advanced Combustion Technologies (ACT), which also provides 

SNCR systems for smaller boilers. ACT’s SNCR technology, sold under the brand name 

HERT, uses a single nozzle injector instead of the multiple nozzle lance system 

developed by Fuel Tech. The HERT system has shown promising levels of NOx

reduction in smaller boilers. Following the purchase of ACT, Fuel Tech developed new 

alternatives for SNCR NOx reduction at larger units, utilizing techniques adapted from 

ACT’s experience. Fuel Tech has recently performed several confidential tests of NOx

reduction on larger boilers firing fuels that are similar to the fuel burned at SJGS. 

Based on the most recent test results, Fuel Tech has indicated that they would be 

willing to guarantee that its SNCR technology can achieve a NOx emission rate of 0.23 

lb/mmBtu with an ammonia slip of 5 ppm at SJGS. According to Fuel Tech, an SNCR 

could be installed at each of the SJGS units using their traditional NOxOUT wall 

injectors, multi-nozzle injection lances, HERT-style injectors, or a combination of one or 

more injection systems. Fuel Tech’s testing program, along with their CFD modeling, 

would determine the correct technology for the application. According to Fuel Tech, the 

technology may be able to achieve even lower NOx emission rates, but full-scale testing 

of the new systems will be necessary to determine whether additional reductions are 

achievable at SJGS. Correspondence with Fuel Tech during the investigation of the 

control effectiveness of this new SNCR technology is included in Attachment 1. Based 

on this new information, the control effectiveness of SNCR in the BART analysis for 

NOx should be revised from 0.24 lb/mmBtu to 0.23 lb/mmBtu. 

BART Analysis Step 4: Impact Analysis / Cost Effectiveness 

 Fuel Tech has indicated that the capital cost for its SNCR system has escalated no 

more that 15 percent from the original estimate provided to PNM in 2007. Revised costs 

for these modifications to the SNCR system are included in Attachment 2, updated to 

reflect fourth quarter 2010 dollars. 
02/09/11 3 

 To allow for a comparison of the costs associated with SNCR to the costs 

associated with the other available and technically feasible controls that have been 

evaluated in previous submittals, the cost calculations for those other controls have also 

been updated to reflect fourth quarter 2010 dollars as well. For the SCR costs, PNM and 

B&V performed a detailed update of the costs using data from the Bureau of Labor 

Statistics in response to questions from the EPA in November – December 2010. A copy 

of the document that was submitted to the EPA is included in Attachment 3, which 

contains a detailed explanation of how the calculation was performed. For the other 

controls listed, including SNCR/SCR hybrid, ROFA/Rotamix, ROFA, and Rotamix, a 

similar calculation was applied. However, the costs associated with ROFA/Rotamix, 

ROFA, and Rotamix were only updated from February 2008 to fourth quarter 2010, since 

the budgetary requests from Mobotec were provided in February 2008. As a result, the 

effect of the update on the calculations for these controls appears somewhat lower than 

the calculations made for SCR and SNCR/SCR hybrid. Attachment 4 provides a detailed 

explanation of these calculations. 

Table 1 shows the impact analysis and cost effectiveness results of each available 

and technically feasible NOx control technology. In addition, the “least cost” curves of 

these technologies are provided as Figures 1 through 4. 
02/09/11 4 

Total Total

Emission Expected Expected Expected Capital Annualized Incremental

Performance Emission Emission Emission Investment Cost Cost Cost Energy 

Level Rate Rate Reduction (TCI) (TAC) Effectiveness Effectiveness Impacts 

All Feasible Technologies (lb/MBtu) (lb/h) (ton/yr) (ton/yr) (1,000$) (1,000$) ($/ton) ($/ton) (1,000$

SJGS Unit 1

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) 0.07 259.5 966 3,174 184,143 20,525 6,466 2,443 1,496 SNCR/SCR Hybrid 0.18 667.3 2,484 1,656 110,683 16,816 10,154 35,917 706 ROFA & Rotamix (Mobotec) 0.20 741.4 2,760 1,380 30,790 6,902 5,001 7,982 1,413 Rotamix (Mobotec) 0.23 852.6 3,174 966 11,822 3,597 3,723 116 51 SNCR (Fuel Tech) 0.23 852.6 3,174 966 17,048 3,582 3,708 80 36 ROFA (Mobotec) 0.26 963.8 3,588 552 19,256 3,549 6,429 -- 1,363 

SJGS Unit 2

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) 0.07 258.2 961 3,158 198,790 21,891 6,932 3,036 1,492 SNCR/SCR Hybrid 0.18 663.8 2,471 1,648 115,151 17,306 10,503 37,887 346 ROFA & Rotamix (Mobotec) 0.20 737.6 2,746 1,373 30,790 6,902 5,027 8,024 1,413 Rotamix (Mobotec) 0.23 848.2 3,158 961 11,822 3,597 3,742 117 51 SNCR (Fuel Tech) 0.23 848.2 3,158 961 17,048 3,582 3,727 80 36 ROFA (Mobotec) 0.26 958.9 3,570 549 19,256 3,549 6,462 -- 1,363 

SJGS Unit 3

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) 0.07 403.1 1,501 4,931 248,416 28,359 5,752 744 2,194 SNCR/SCR Hybrid 0.18 1,036.4 3,859 2,572 178,759 26,604 10,342 39,171 507 ROFA & Rotamix (Mobotec) 0.20 1,151.6 4,287 2,144 35,724 9,810 4,576 7,498 2,810 Rotamix (Mobotec) 0.23 1,324.3 4,931 1,501 13,919 4,988 3,324 -378 84 SNCR (Fuel Tech) 0.23 1,324.3 4,931 1,501 21,220 4,859 3,238 -578 36 ROFA (Mobotec) 0.26 1,497.1 5,574 857 22,081 5,231 6,100 -- 2,725 

SJGS Unit 4

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) 0.07 395.4 1,472 4,837 230,089 26,592 5,497 339 2,215 SNCR/SCR Hybrid 0.18 1,016.8 3,786 2,524 171,412 25,808 10,226 38,034 507 ROFA & Rotamix (Mobotec) 0.20 1,129.8 4,206 2,103 35,724 9,810 4,664 7,643 2,810 Rotamix (Mobotec) 0.23 1,299.3 4,837 1,472 13,919 4,988 3,388 -385 84 SNCR (Fuel Tech) 0.23 1,299.3 4,837 1,472 21,220 4,859 3,301 -590 36 ROFA (Mobotec) 0.26 1,468.7 5,468 841 22,081 5,231 6,218 -- 2,725 

Notes:1. Costs for all technologies are shown in fourth quarter 2010 dollars. Costs were escalated from the original BART estimate calculations.2. Expected emission rates (ton/yr) calculations were based on 85 percent unit capacity factor (refer to Appendix A Design Basis in June 6, 2007 BART Application Document).3. Expected emission reduction (ton/yr) calculations were based on control effectiveness described in submittal and baseline emission (refer to June 6, 2007 BART Application D4. TCI and TAC are referenced from Attachment 2, 3, and 4.5. Cost-effectiveness ($/ton) is defined as ratio of TAC over Expected Emission Reduction (ton/yr).6. Expected emission reduction is based on annual emission reduction from baseline upgrade emission levels.7. Incremental cost effectiveness are based on increments in expected emission reduction (ton/yr).

Table 1

Impact Analysis and Cost Effectiveness Results of Additional NOx Control Technologies for SJGS
02/09/11 5 

Figure 1

SJGS 1 NOx Technology Least Cost Curve

0

2,5005,0007,500

10,00012,50015,00017,50020,00022,50025,000

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 

Expected Emissions Reduction (ton/yr)

Total Annualized Cost (1,000$/yr)

SNCR/SCR Hybrid Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) Dominant ControlsSNCR (Fuel Tech) ROFA (Mobotec) ROFA & Rotamix (Rotamix (Mobotec)
02/09/11 6 

Figure 2

SJGS 2 NOx Technology Least Cost Curve

0

2,5005,0007,500

10,00012,50015,00017,50020,00022,50025,000

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 

Expected Emissions Reduction (ton/yr)

Total Annualized Cost (1,000$/yr)

SNCR/SCR Hybrid Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) Dominant ControlsSNCR (Fuel Tech) ROFA (Mobotec) ROFA & Rotamix (Rotamix (Mobotec)
02/09/11 7 

Figure 3

SJGS 3 NOx Technology Least Cost Curve

0

2,5005,0007,500

10,00012,50015,00017,50020,00022,50025,00027,50030,000

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 5,000 

Expected Emissions Reduction (ton/yr)

Total Annualized Cost (1,000$/yr)

SNCR/SCR Hybrid Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) Dominant ControlsSNCR (Fuel Tech) ROFA (Mobotec) ROFA & Rotamix (Rotamix (Mobotec)
02/09/11 8 

Figure 4

SJGS 4 NOx Technology Least Cost Curve

0

2,5005,0007,500

10,00012,50015,00017,50020,00022,50025,00027,50030,000

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 5,000 

Expected Emissions Reduction (ton/yr)

Total Annualized Cost (1,000$/yr)

SNCR/SCR Hybrid Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) Dominant ControlsSNCR (Fuel Tech) ROFA (Mobotec) ROFA & Rotamix (Rotamix (Mobotec)
02/09/11 9 

BART Analysis Step 5: Visibility Analysis 

CALPUFF modeling analyses were performed to provide SJGS plant-wide 

visibility impacts at 16 Class I areas for the SNCR NOx control technology. For 

consistency, the modeling methodology and modeling refinements contained in this 

submittal use “nitrate repartitioning” and the “variable ammonia background,” based on 

the November 6, 2007 refinements provided to NMED. These refinements are 

summarized below. 

Nitrate Repartitioning 

Nitrate repartitioning has been included to better account for the amount of 

particulate nitrate (NO3) by limiting the available ammonia when individual unit puffs 

overlap. The original visibility modeling conducted for the June 2, 2007 BART 

application did not incorporate repartitioning of available ammonia (MNITRATE = 0). 

The refinements did not allow each overlapping puff(s) to use the full ammonia 

background value but instead only a portion of the ammonia available (MNITRATE = 1). 

This concept is reflected in Section 3.1.2.6 of the CALMET/CALPUFF Protocol for 

BART Exemption Screening Analysis for Class I Areas in the Western United States dated 

August 15, 2006, (hereinafter referred to as the WRAP Protocol). “Nitrate 

repartitioning” does not refer to the ammonia limiting method commonly referred to as 

“ALM.” 

Ammonia Background Concentration 

The Sithe Global Power, LLC’s Desert Rock Energy Facility and the Toquop 

Energy Projects located in the southwestern United States recently used variable monthly 

background ammonia concentrations, based on ammonia background concentrations 

monitored at several western class I areas. Based on this information, SJGS’s BART 

modeling reflects these approved values, presented in Table 2 for reference. 
02/09/11 10 

Table 2 

Variable Monthly Ammonia 

Background Concentration1

Month 

Background Ammonia 

Concentration 

(ppb) 

January 0.2 

February 0.2 

March 0.2 

April 0.5 

May 0.5 

June 1.0 

July 1.0 

August 1.0 

September 1.0 

October 0.5 

November 0.5 

December 0.2 

1

The ammonia data and supporting information 

for the values contained in Desert Rock Energy 

Facility and the Toquop Energy Project 

visibility analyses were included in detail in 

Attachment 1 of the March 31, 2008 report 

submittal. 

Visibility Modeling Results 

The expected degree of visibility improvement for the SNCR control technology 

scenario was determined based on the difference between the maximum visibility impact 

for the baseline (taking into account the existing NOx combustion controls) and the 

maximum visibility impact for the SNCR control technology scenario, as determined for 

each receptor at each of the sixteen Class I areas. The baseline includes the effects of the 

NOx combustion controls currently installed and operating at each SJGS unit. The stack 

outlet conditions which were modeled for each scenario are included in Attachment 5. 

The results of the refined visibility modeling for the SJGS plant, assuming the 

same SNCR control technology is installed on all four units, are illustrated in Tables 1 

through 3 of Attachment 6. These tables summarize the scenarios and the maximum 

visibility (deciview) impact projected at any of the 16 Class I areas at any time over the 
02/09/11 11 

2001 to 2003 period. Attachment 7 includes (i) the plant-wide summary of the 98th 

percentile visibility impact for the modeled scenarios, (ii) the number of days above 0.5 

dv threshold, and (iii) the contribution of each pollutant associated with the 98th 

percentile visibility impact for each Class I area. 

The visibility modeling analysis indicates an improvement in visibility impact at 

each of the 16 Class I areas. The maximum visibility (deciview) improvement projected 

at any of the 16 Class I areas at any time over the 2001 to 2003 period is illustrated in 

Table 3 of Attachment 6. These maximum visibility improvements between the baseline 

and the SNCR control scenarios range from 0.05 dv to 0.22 dv of expected visibility 

improvement. Based on the visibility improvement modeled and the total annual cost 

evaluated in the impact analysis stage of this document, the cost-effectiveness for 

visibility improvement (annual cost per improvement in visibility, $/dv), was determined 

for SJGS over the range of visibility improvement. The cost effectiveness of installing 

SNCRs at all four SJGS units ranges from $352 million/dv to $79 million/dv over the 

range of visibility improvements at the different Class I areas. 

Unit-specific results for the SNCR technology will be provided in a separate 

submission. 

IV. Summary 

The information provided above is intended to assist the New Mexico 

Environment Department in preparing its BART determination for the San Juan 

Generating Station. As noted above, additional information recently obtained by PNM 

suggests that SNCR is capable of achieving a NOx emission rate of 0.23 lb/mmBtu, based 

on the guarantee provided by Fuel Tech, which will result in an overall reduction in NOx

emissions of 4,900 tons. Additionally, those NOx emission reductions will result in 

additional visibility improvements at each of the 16 Class I areas reviewed for this BART 

analysis. 
02/09/11 

Attachment 1 

Communication from FuelTech on SNCR (2/8/2011) 
Fuel Tech, Inc. • 120 Long Ridge Road • Stamford, CT 06902 • PH: (203) 323-8401 • FX: (203) 967-2366

 William E. Cummings, Jr. 

 Senior Vice President 

 Air Pollution Control Sales 

 February 8, 2011 

Ms. Diane M. Fischer, P.E. 

Air Quality Business Development Manager 

BLACK & VEATCH 

11401 Lamar Avenue 

Overland Park, KS 66211 

RE: FUEL TECH, INC. PROPOSAL 07-B-047 

Dear Ms. Fischer: 

Fuel Tech has reviewed the data contained in FTI Proposal 07-B-047 and our overall experience with the 

combined HERT and NOxOUT injection strategies. Provided the San Juan process conditions 

reasonably match those indicated in the aforementioned proposal and the baseline NOx is at or below 

0.30 LBS/MMBtu, Fuel Tech’s SNCR systems will, for the subject application, be capable of achieving a 

controlled NOx emission rate of 0.23 LBS/MMBtu or less with an expected ammonia slip limit of 5 ppm. 

Further, our experience with testing of a combined HERT/NOxOUT system and a NOxOUT system for 

confidential clients on utility boilers firing western US coals, provides us with the confidence necessary to 

support commercial guarantees for these controlled emission levels. 

While we remain comfortable with this determination, we have yet to confirm this performance prediction 

through temperature/gas species testing, computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and chemical kinetic 

modeling (CKM). It would also be prudent to confirm the selected scope of supply can indeed be 

installed without interference or compromise due to the San Juan unit configurations. Fuel Tech strongly 

recommends that PSNM complete the above recommended testing and modeling in an effort to generate 

a firm commercial guarantee. 

We hope you find this information helpful. Should you or your staff have any questions or comments 

please do not hesitate to contact our offices. 

 Very truly yours, 

 

WEC:bav 
02/09/11 

Attachment 2 

Updated SNCR Costs 
02/09/11 

PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Technology: Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction - SJGS Unit 1 & 2 Date: 1/24/2011

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

SNCR system scope: $4,962,000 From vendor quote (FuelTech), escalated by 15 percent,

Reagent delivery system per email from Fuel Tech dated 1/23/2011

Wall injectors and multiple nozzle lances

Automatic injector and lance retract system

Flue gas temperature monitors

Reagent storage tank $100,000 B&V cost estimate

NOx monitoring system $220,000 B&V cost estimate

Electrical system upgrades $189,000 B&V cost estimate

Instrumentation and control system $279,000 B&V cost estimate

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $5,750,000

Gross Receipt Tax $355,781 (CC) X 6.2%

Freight $287,500 (CC) X 5.0%

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $6,393,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $639,000 (PEC) X 10.0%

Handling & erection $1,918,000 (PEC) X 30.0%

Electrical $639,000 (PEC) X 10.0%

Piping $160,000 (PEC) X 2.5%

Insulation $0 (PEC) X 0.0%

Painting $0 (PEC) X 0.0%

Demolition $320,000 (PEC) X 5.0%

Relocation $128,000 (PEC) X 2.0%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $3,804,000

Air preheater modifications $1,071,000 B&V cost estimate

Site preparation $0 N/A

Buildings $0 N/A

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $11,268,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $789,000 (DC) X 7.0%

Owner's cost $563,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Construction management $1,127,000 (DC) X 10.0%

Start-up and spare parts $338,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Performance test $100,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate

Contingencies $2,254,000 (DC) X 20.0%

Total indirect costs (IC) $5,171,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $609,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $17,048,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated manpower level

Maintenance labor and materials $338,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $463,000

Variable annual costs

Reagent $1,417,000 906 lb/hr and 420 $/ton Engineering estimate

Auxiliary and ID fan power $36,000 80 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Estimate in vendor quote

Water $6,000 39 gpm and 0.33 $/1,000 gal Engineering estimate

Total variable annual costs $1,459,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $1,922,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $1,660,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $1,660,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $3,582,000
02/09/11 

PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Technology: Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction - SJGS Unit 3 & 4 Date: 1/24/2011

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST

Direct Costs

Purchased equipment costs

SNCR system scope: $6,462,000 From vendor quote (FuelTech), escalated by 15 percent,

Reagent delivery system per email from Fuel Tech dated 1/23/2011

Wall injectors and multiple nozzle lances

Automatic injector and lance retract system

Flue gas temperature monitors

Reagent storage tank $100,000 B&V cost estimate

NOx monitoring system $220,000 B&V cost estimate

Electrical system upgrades $242,000 B&V cost estimate

Instrumentation and control system $291,000 B&V cost estimate

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $7,315,000

Gross Receipt Tax $452,616 (CC) X 6.2%

Freight $365,750 (CC) X 5.0%

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $8,133,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $813,000 (PEC) X 10.0%

Handling & erection $2,440,000 (PEC) X 30.0%

Electrical $813,000 (PEC) X 10.0%

Piping $203,000 (PEC) X 2.5%

Insulation $0 (PEC) X 0.0%

Painting $0 (PEC) X 0.0%

Demolition $407,000 (PEC) X 5.0%

Relocation $163,000 (PEC) X 2.0%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $4,839,000

Air preheater modifications $1,071,000 B&V cost estimate

Site preparation $0 N/A

Buildings $0 N/A

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $14,043,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $983,000 (DC) X 7.0%

Owner's cost $702,000 (DC) X 5.0%

Construction management $1,404,000 (DC) X 10.0%

Start-up and spare parts $421,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Performance test $100,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate

Contingencies $2,809,000 (DC) X 20.0%

Total indirect costs (IC) $6,419,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $758,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2)

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $21,220,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated manpower level

Maintenance labor and materials $421,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $546,000

Variable annual costs

Reagent $2,201,000 1,408 lb/hr and 420 $/ton Engineering estimate

Auxiliary and ID fan power $36,000 80 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Estimate in vendor quote

Water $9,000 60 gpm and 0.33 $/1,000 gal Engineering estimate

Total variable annual costs $2,246,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $2,792,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $2,067,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $2,067,000

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $4,859,000
02/09/11 

Attachment 3 

Updated SCR Costs, As Submitted to the EPA 
10/22/2010 

B&V E-2 and E-4 1 

San Juan Generation Station BART Project 

Review and Update of 2007 BART Cost Estimates 

1.0 Introduction 

The purpose of this document is to update the cost estimates for application of 

SCR at the San Juan Generating Station that were performed by B&V in May of 2007 in 

support of PNM’s BART application. The following items were assessed in this update: 

• Impact of escalation on the prices included in the original BART estimate. 

• Impact of auxiliary power limitations at San Juan Generation Station. 

• Impact of changes to the draft system resulting from the addition of the 

consent decree air quality control equipment. 

• Impact of other general changes to the price. 

It should be noted that the potential impact of lead and asbestos abatement on the 

price of SCR upgrades at San Juan was not assessed by B&V. These costs are site 

specific and can not be determined until the project is under construction. 

This document presents a discussion of each impact. The last section of this 

document presents the revised cost estimates that incorporate all impacts to the costs. 

2.0 Price Escalation 

The estimates developed by B&V for the BART project were completed in May 

2007. PNM requested B&V to perform an escalation analysis to update the BART 

estimates from May 2007 to current day dollars (Oct 2010). First, B&V utilized the 

corporate escalation tool for this analysis. The tool was jointly developed by Black & 

Veatch and an outside consulting firm that specializes in financial analysis and 

forecasting. For the purposes of this analysis the costs were grouped into three major 

categories: 

• Materials (steel, pipe, cable, etc.) 

• Equipment (pumps, tanks, switchgear, etc) 

• Labor 
10/22/2010 

B&V E-2 and E-4 2 

The resulting price escalation between May 2007 and October 2010 is shown in 

Table 1. It should be noted that the escalation shown is cumulative over the period. 

There were portions of this period where escalation was negative. However, there were 

also periods where escalation was extremely high. 

Table 1 

Escalation Calculation Using 

B&V’s Corporate Escalation Tool 

May 2007 to October 2010 

Cost Item Cumulative Escalation Rate 

Materials 10.0 percent increase 

Equipment 10.0 percent increase 

Labor 9.7 percent increase 

Average 10.0 percent increase 

B&V also compared the values from the corporate escalation tool to values 

available from the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Producer Price Index” and 

the “Employer Cost for Employee Compensation Index”. To do this comparison, B&V 

selected several representative cost categories and checked the index for those categories 

between May 2007 and September 2010 (latest data available). Table 2 is a summary of 

that investigation. The screen shots from the Bureau of Labor Statistics website that form 

the basis for Table 2 have been included for reference in Appendix A of this document. 

The data in Table 1 and Table 2 are relatively comparable. However, since the 

data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics can be independently verified, B&V has 

utilized the values in Table 2 to escalate the BART estimates for San Juan Generating 

Station. The quantitative impacts to the costs will be presented in Section 5.0. 
10/22/2010 

B&V E-2 and E-4 3 

Table 2 

Escalation Calculation Using 

Data from U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 

Index Value 

Cost item May 2007 Sept 2007 

Change 

(Escalation) 

Materials 

 Plate Steel 119.2 137.5 15.4 

 Cable 160.8 166.1 3.3 

 Steel Pipe 170.1 195.7 15.0

Average 11.2 

Equipment 

 Pumps 117.9 129.7 10.0 

 Switchgear 179.1 195.2 9.0 

 Tanks 132.6 140.8 6.2

Average 8.4 

Construction Labor 

(see note) $29.48/hr $31.43/hr 6.6 

Note: 

Values for construction labor are in $/hour. The Bureau of Labor Statistics only has data 

available by quarter (1st quarter, 2nd quarter, etc.) and only has data through 2nd quarter of 

2010 (not 3rd quarter 2010). 

3.0 Auxiliary Power 

The original BART estimate included limited costs for upgrades to the auxiliary 

power systems that will be needed to address the increased loads resulting from the 

addition of SCR and associated equipment. The SCR results in additional parasitic load 

at the site due to the additional fan power needed to overcome the pressure drop 

associated with the SCR and to provide additional power for ancillary equipment needed 

to operate the SCR. In the initial 2007 estimate, PNM expected the existing auxiliary 

power to be sufficient. However, now that the consent decree AQC equipment has been 
10/22/2010 

B&V E-2 and E-4 4 

installed, B&V has determined that the current auxiliary power system is not sufficient to 

power the additional loads that would result from adding SCR and associated equipment. 

B&V anticipates the following minimum load changes (no balanced draft 

conversion) as a result of the SCR’s: 

• Unit 1 - ID fan increase of 4,400 hp 

• Unit 2 - ID fan increase of 4,400 hp (same as Unit 1) 

• Unit 3 - ID fan increase of 13,000 hp 

• Unit 4 - ID fan increase of 13,000 hp (same as Unit 3) 

• Other aux loads are as 140 kW (each) for Units 1 and 2 and 190 kW (each 

for Units 3 and 4. 

From these minimum auxiliary power requirements, the following assumptions 

were made about the station. These assumptions are based on the information available 

at this time. 

• The existing start-up buses are limited. 

• The startup issues are transformer limitations that require the additional 

power to be fed from the 345 kV switchyard. 

• When motors are started, 85 percent bus undervoltage is acceptable and 80 

percent motor undervoltage is acceptable. 

• Two 3-breaker connection bays can be added to the 345 kV yard. 

• The Units 1 and 2 ID fans will be 6,000 hp, three per unit, at 6.9 kV. 

• The Units 3 and 4 ID fans will be 9,000 hp, three per unit, at 6.9 kV. 

• Two additional bays (to feed the four new transformers) can be added to 

the 345 kV switchyard. 

• Four new transformers will be required because of the new fan sizes. The 

transformers would be sized to power and start across the line fans for 

both sister units. In other words, Units 1 and 2 would be coupled together 

and Units 3 and 4 would be coupled together. 

• There is adequate space near the new ID Fans is available to install new 

switchgear and transformers. 

With these assumptions, the following additional equipment would be needed to 

power the SCR new equipment. The quantities listed are for the entire plant. 
10/22/2010 

B&V E-2 and E-4 5 

• Two 345kV bays (includes 6 – 345 kV 3-phase breakers, 16 – 345 kV 3-

phase motorized disconnect switches) 

• Two 40 MVA 345 kV to 6.9 kV transformers (for Units 1 and 2) 

• Two 60 MVA 345 kV to 12.47 kV transformers (for Units 3 and 4) 

• One 6.9 kV Switchgear lineup Main-Tie-Main with 8 feeder breakers, 

3000 A bus for Units 1 and 2. 

• One 12.49kV Switchgear lineup Main-Tie-Main with 8 feeder breakers, 

3000 A bus for Units 3 and 4. 

• Four 480 V single ended secondary unit substations (SUS), with motor 

control center (MCC) sections. 

Figure 1 is a conceptual one-line diagram showing this configuration. The cost 

for this additional equipment is summarized in Table 3. These costs are conceptual, 

based on in-house data. B&V did not obtain outside quotations specifically for this 

project to develop these costs. These costs are included in the overall update of the SCR 

costs that are presented in Section 5.0. 

Table 3 

Presentation of Costs for Auxiliary Electrical Equipment Requirements 

for SCR Systems at San Juan Station 

Equipment Cost Item Estimate Amount 

345 kV Bays $3,500,000

Transformers (for Units 1 and 2) $2,000,000

Transformers (for Units 3 and 4) $3,000,000

6.9 kV Switchgear Line Up (Units 1 and 2) $7,000,000

12.49 kV Switchgear Line Up (Units 3 and 4) $10,000,000

Four Secondary Unit Substations with Motor Control Centers $4,000,000

Total $29,500,000

Amount Attributable to Units 1 and 2 $6,400,000 (each)

Amount Attributable to Units 3 and 4 $8,350,000 (each)
10/22/2010 

B&V E-2 and E-4 6 

Figure 1 

Conceptual One-Line Diagram for 

New Auxiliary Electrical Equipment Associated with SCR Systems 

4.0 Assessment of Draft Systems 

Implosion studies were performed for Units 1-4 at SJGS for the implementation 

of the modifications required by the consent decree of 2005, which included the 

installation of new pollution control equipment and new induced draft (ID) booster fans 

(although the furnace continued operation in pressurized mode). These studies modeled 

various transient conditions that could potentially occur during unit operation (including 

upset conditions) and reviewed the corresponding pressures across the furnace and flue 

gas stream. The studies did not consider the effect of operating the booster fans with a 

loss of airside gas path that could occur with air side damper failure. This analysis was 

not required at the time but would be required to be in compliance with the current code. 

This is discussed in more detail below. 

B&V has reviewed the implosion studies and their impact on the original BART 

estimate for the balance draft conversion. The design basis from each implosion study 
10/22/2010 

B&V E-2 and E-4 7 

was also validated against current plant operating data. B&V used this design basis 

information as the basis for updated recommendations concerning the draft system. The 

figures in Appendix B show the current draft configuration as well as the draft 

configuration after addition of SCR. 

As a result of the implosion studies, PNM made some physical modifications to 

the boilers and some modifications to the controls during the installation of the new 

control equipment required by the consent decree. These modifications brought Units 1-4 

into compliance with the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Code 85 for the 

2004 revision of the code. The following is a summary of the modifications that were 

made to the draft systems as part of the consent decree work: 

• The open stack system upstream of the FGD system was permanently 

closed in conjunction with the fabric filter addition. 

• The boiler penthouse floor (furnace roof) was stiffened with the addition 

of beams. 

• Buckstay clips (connections to furnace walls) were added and cover plates 

were placed over some of the buckstay webs. 

• The inlet ductwork penetration to the ESP was stiffened using internal 

bracing. 

• Based on the stiffening modifications made, the control system was 

programmed to “trip” (shut the unit down) if the pressure in the units 

exceeded a range of -2 / +18 inches wg. 

The following modifications were not made to the draft system: 

• Buckstays were not installed in the corners of the boiler. 

• Trusses were not installed in the windbox. 

At the time of the consent decree work, the NFPA requirements (2004 revision) 

were unclear on how to handle the addition of ID booster fans on units that were still to 

be operated in a pressurized furnace mode. In 2007 the requirements were clarified to 

define that any unit with a fan between the boiler and stack must meet the same 

requirements as a “balanced draft” unit and be stiffened accordingly. This requires that 
10/22/2010 

B&V E-2 and E-4 8 

the furnace either be designed for +/- 35 inches or the ratings of the ID/booster fans 

corrected to ambient temperature (whichever is less). The key provisions of the NFPA 

85 code are quoted below: 

Article 1.3.1: The code shall apply to new installations and to major 

alterations or extensions that are contracted for subsequent to the effective 

date of this code. 

 

Article 1.4.1 Unless otherwise specified, the provisions in this code shall 

not apply to facilities equipment, structures, or installations that existed or 

were approved for construction or installation prior to the effective date of 

the code. 

 

Article 4.6.1: The furnace shall be capable of withstanding transient 

design pressures and normal operating pressures without permanent 

deformation due to yield or buckling of any support member. Transient 

pressures to be considered shall include but shall not necessarily be 

limited to misoperation of fans or dampers and a master fuel trip while 

operating at maximum design load.

 

Article 6.5.1.3: Balanced Draft Units. All boilers with a fan located in the 

flue gas path downstream of the boiler enclosure shall be designed in 

accordance with either 6.5.1.3.1 or 6.5.1.3.2. 

 6.5.1.3.1 The furnace and flue gas removal system shall be designed so 

that the maximum head capability of the induced draft fan system with 

ambient air does not exceed the continuous design pressure of furnace, 

ducts, and associated equipment.

 6.5.1.3.2 Where a furnace pressure control system in accordance with 

6.5.2 is provided, the furnace shall be designed for the transient design 

pressures in 6.5.1.3.2.1 and 6.5.1.3.2.2.
10/22/2010 

B&V E-2 and E-4 9 

 6.5.1.3.2.1 Positive Transient Design Pressure. The positive transient 

design pressure shall be at least, but shall not be required to exceed, +8.7 

kPa (+35 in. of water).

 6.5.1.3.2.2 Negative Transient Design Pressure. The negative transient 

design pressure shall be at least as negative as, but shall not be required 

to be more negative than, −8.7 kPa (−35 in. of water).

Accordingly, NFPA 85 now requires SJGS to increase the pressure ratings of the 

boilers to +/- 35 inches wg if the capacity of the ID /booster fans is increased. To comply 

with NFPA 85, and increase the pressure rating of the units to +/- 35 inches wg, SJGS 

will have to install buckstay corner connections, buckstay over-turning posts, and will 

likely have to install air heater stiffening as well. While some buckstay clips were added 

for the consent decree work, the spacing of those clips is unknown. Therefore, it is 

assumed that some additional clips would be needed to increase the pressure rating from 

the current level of -2 / +18 inches wg to +/- 35 inches wg. 

The fabric filters will also require additional stiffening to increase the continuous 

pressure rating to that of the new ID fan test block suction pressure. B&V expects that 

the hot ESP casing will require stiffening as well. B&V continues to recommend a 

balanced draft conversion be performed on all four units at SJGS if SCR installation is 

required. Due to the 2007 NFPA 85 revisions, stiffening of the boiler and other 

components will be required regardless of whether a balanced draft conversion is 

performed (the majority of the costs associated with the balanced draft conversion are 

related to boiler stiffening). 

Table 4 and Table 5 provide the updated cost estimates for the balanced draft 

conversion. Costs for stiffening the fabric filters have been added as it was determined 

that the fabric filters will also need to be stiffened if the capacity of the booster fans is 

increased to allow for SCR operation. Tables 4 and 5 also show a column for deleting 

the balance draft conversion portion of the work. In this scenario, the boiler would 

remain a positive pressure boiler, but the stiffening work, required by NFPA 85, would 

still need to be completed. As a result, the long outage associated with the boiler 

stiffening would also be required regardless of whether the units remain pressurized or 
10/22/2010 

B&V E-2 and E-4 10 

are converted to balanced draft. If a balanced draft conversion is not performed, new, 

low-speed motors for the FD fans would not be required and the ID fans would be 

smaller, resulting in a total cost savings of $1.5 million. 

Table 4 

Updated Costs for Balanced Draft Conversion 

Units 1 and 2 (2007 Dollars)

Units 1 & 2 BART Study Updated 

Balanced Draft Conversion 

Engineering 

& Material 

Construction 

Labor Costs 

Engineering 

& Material 

Construction 

Labor Costs 

Pressurized 

Furnace 

Differential

Boiler 

Stiffening $1,335,000 $1,418,000 $1,335,000 $1,418,000 (Same)

Scaffolding -- $195,000 -- $195,000 (Same)

Insulation & Lagging $139,000 $1,197,000 $139,000 $1,197,000 (Same)

Ductwork & Casing Repairs 

(Allowance) $182,000 $1,008,000 $182,000 $1,008,000 (Same)

Air Heater 

Stiffening $106,000 $195,000 $106,000 $195,000 (Same)

Electrostatic Precipitator 

Stiffening (Excludes 

Casing Repairs) $341,000 $1,114,000 $341,000 $1,114,000 (Same)

Insulation & Lagging 

(Allowance) $84,000 $418,000 $84,000 $418,000 (Same)

Electrical/Control 

Modifications $159,000 $334,000 $159,000 $334,000 (Same)

New Transformer (Note 2) $1,000,000 $0 

Fan Modifications 

FD Fans (new motors only) $490,000 $86,000 $490,000 $86,000 ($576,000)

ID Fans $2,400,000 $840,000 $2,400,000 $840,000 ($500,000)

Fabric Filter (assumed same 

as ESP) 

Stiffening (Excludes Casing 

Repairs) $341,000 $1,114,000 (Same)

Insulation & Lagging 

(Allowance) $84,000 $418,000 (Same)

Miscellaneous Mech 

Commodities & 

 Instrumentation $325,000 -- $325,000 -- (Same)

Subtotal $6,561,000 $6,805,000 $5,986,000 $8,337,000 ($1,076,000)

Notes: 

1. Excludes Contingency and Indirects 

2. Auxiliary electric costs are being accounted for in a separate analysis. Refer to Section 3.0 of this report. 

Therefore, they are being deleted from the balanced draft conversion estimate. 
10/22/2010 

B&V E-2 and E-4 11 

Table 5 

Updated Costs for Balanced Draft Conversion 

Units 3 and 4 (2007 Dollars)

Units 3&4 BART Study Updated 

Balanced Draft Conversion 

Engineering 

& Material 

Construction 

Labor Costs 

Engineering 

& Material 

Construction 

Labor Costs 

Pressurized 

Furnace 

Differential

Boiler 

Stiffening $1,537,000 $1,908,000 $1,537,000 $1,908,000 (Same)

Scaffolding - - $262,000 - - $263,000 (Same)

Insulation & Lagging $188,000 $1,438,000 $188,000 $1,438,000 (Same)

Ductwork & Casing 

Repairs (Allowance) $182,000 $1,009,000 $182,000 $1,009,000 (Same)

Air Heater 

Stiffening $125,000 $263,000 $125,000 $263,000 (Same)

Electrostatic Precipitator 

Stiffening (Excludes 

Casing Repairs) $416,000 $1,500,000 $416,000 $1,500,000 (Same)

Insulation & Lagging 

(Allowance) $113,000 $563,000 $113,000 $563,000 (Same)

Electrical/Control 

Modifications $214,000 $450,000 $214,000 $450,000 (Same)

New Transformer (Note 2) $1,000,000 $0 

Fan Modifications 

FD Fans (new motors only) $660,000 $116,000 $660,000 $116,000 ($776,000)

ID Fans $3,600,000 $1,260,000 $3,600,000 $1,260,000 ($800,000)

Fabric Filter (assumed 

same as ESP) 

Stiffening (Excludes 

Casing Repairs) $416,000 $1,500,000 (Same)

Insulation & Lagging 

(Allowance) $113,000 $563,000 (Same)

Miscellaneous Mech 

Commodities & 

 Instrumentation $325,000 - - $325,000 - - (Same)

Subtotal $8,357,000 $8,765,000 $7,886,000 $10,828,000 ($1,576,000)

Notes: 

1. Excludes Contingency and Indirects. 

2. Auxiliary electric costs are being accounted for in a separate analysis. Refer to Section 3.0 of this report. 

Therefore, they are being deleted from the balanced draft conversion estimate. 
10/22/2010 

B&V E-2 and E-4 12 

The values presented in Tables 4 and 5 are in 2007 dollars and will be included in 

the revised estimates presented in Section 5.0. 

5.0 Updated Cost Estimates 

This section of the document will present the updated capital cost estimates for 

the SCR systems on San Juan Generating Station. A summary of the updates is shown in 

Table 6. The details of the updated costs are presented in Tables 7 through 10. The 

following updates were made to the original BART cost estimates: 

• Escalation to 2010 dollars, as described in Section 2.0 of this document. 

• Auxiliary power system costs, as described in Section 3.0 of this 

document. 

• Balanced draft conversion updates, as described in Section 4.0 of this 

document. 

• Correction to the error in expansion joint costs, noted to the EPA on 

October 8, 2010. 

• Correction to air heater costs for Units 3 and 4. The costs for 

modifications to the secondary air heaters were inadvertently double 

counted. 

• Reduction in ductwork steel costs to move to the use of ASTM A572 duct 

material instead of ASTM A588 Grade B material. This issue is 

discussed in greater detail in the follow up responses to the conference call 

held with the EPA on October 13, 2010. 

Line items in Tables 7 through 10 that have changes as a direct result of one of 

the items listed above are shown in red in the tables. Since the estimate is a factored 

estimate, a change to one line item will change other line items that are factors. For 

example, as the total purchased equipment cost (PEC) changes, the cost for “handling and 

erection” will also change because it is a multiplication factor of the purchased 

equipment cost. 
10/22/2010 

B&V E-2 and E-4 13 

Table 6

Summary of SCR Capital Cost Updates

for San Juan Station

Unit No. 2007 BART Estimate 2010 Updated Cost Estimate Change

1 $156,805,000 $194,101,000 +23.8 %

2 $169,251,000 $209,652,000 +23.9 %

3 $215,568,000 $261,954,000 +21.5 %

4 $199,558,000 $242,377,000 +21.5 %

Total $741,182,000 $908,084,000 +22.5 %

As can be seen in Table 6, the costs for SCR are higher than the original estimate. 

The two main causes of these changes are the escalation to 2010 dollars and the auxiliary 

power system upgrades that are required 

The cost increases shown above include the recommended balanced draft 

conversion costs. For comparison purposes, B&V did examine the impact to the costs if 

only the “boiler stiffening” work discussed in Section 4.0 is done (boiler, duct, ESP, air 

heater, and fabric filter stiffening in accordance with NFPA 85) but not the additional fan 

work that would be associated with the balance draft conversion. The result of this 

analysis showed that the updated costs will be only slightly different when the costs 

solely attributable to the balanced draft conversion are excluded -- an increase of 21.3 

percent (for the whole station) compared with 22.5 percent, for a total difference of 

$9,192,000 (about 1 percent of the project cost). As discussed in Section 4.0, the 

difference is slight because all of the boiler stiffening work is required (with or without 

balance draft conversion). The only difference in the total price for including the 

balanced draft conversion is the difference in fan costs. 
10/22/2010 

B&V E-2 and E-4 14 

Table 7 - PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Updated Cost Analysis

Technology: Selective Catalytic Reduction - SJGS Unit 1 Date: 10/21/2010

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost BasisOriginal 2007 BART Cost Estimate Escalation Escalat

Direct Costs Current Value Comments on Updates to Oct 2010 Percenta

Purchased equipment costs

Anhydrous Ammonia Injection System $437,000 B&V cost estimate $437,000 $473,708 8.

Anhydrous Ammonia Vaporization System $436,000 B&V cost estimate $436,000 $472,624 8.

Reactor Box, Breeching and Ductwork $4,451,000 B&V cost estimate $4,005,900 Adjustement for ASTM A572 $4,454,561 11.Ductwork Expansion Joints $294,000 B&V cost estimate $147,000 Correction $159,348 8.

Catalyst $2,557,000 B&V cost estimate $2,557,000 $2,557,000 0.

Sonic Horns $188,000 B&V cost estimate $188,000 $203,792 8.

Elevator $1,236,000 B&V cost estimate $1,236,000 $1,339,824 8.

Structural Steel $4,881,000 B&V cost estimate $4,881,000 $5,427,672 11.

SCR Bypass $10,000,000 B&V cost estimate $10,000,000 $10,840,000 8.

NOx Monitoring System $440,000 B&V cost estimate $440,000 $476,960 8.

Electrical System Upgrade $378,000 B&V cost estimate $378,000 $409,752 8.Auxiliary Electric System Requirements $0 Not in estimate $6,400,000 Added, Refer to Sect. 3.0 $6,400,000 0.Instrumentation and Control System $279,000 B&V cost estimate $279,000 $302,436 8.

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $25,577,000 $31,384,900 $33,517,677

Gross Receipt Tax $1,583,000 (CC) X 6.2% $1,942,000 $2,074,000

Freight $1,279,000 (CC) X 5.0% $1,569,000 $1,676,000

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $28,439,000 $34,896,000 $37,268,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $8,532,000 (PEC) X 30.0% $10,468,800 $11,117,866 6.

Handling & erection $8,532,000 (PEC) X 30.0% $10,468,800 $11,117,866 6.

Electrical $4,266,000 (PEC) X 15.0% $5,234,400 $5,558,933 6.

Piping $711,000 (PEC) X 2.5% $872,400 $926,489 6.

Insulation $2,844,000 (PEC) X 10.0% $3,489,600 $3,705,955 6.

Painting $284,000 (PEC) X 1.0% $348,960 $370,596 6.

Demolition $2,844,000 (PEC) X 10.0% $3,489,600 $3,705,955 6.

Relocation $1,422,000 (PEC) X 5.0% $1,744,800 $1,852,978 6.

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $29,435,000 $36,117,360 $38,356,636

Air preheater modifications $1,071,000 B&V cost estimate $1,071,000 $1,160,964 8.

Balanced draft conversion $13,366,000 B&V cost estimate $14,323,000 Refer to Section 4.0 $15,526,132 8.

Site preparation $2,000,000 Engineering estimate $2,000,000 $2,000,000 0.Buildings & enclosures $500,000 Engineering estimate $500,000 $500,000 0.

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $74,811,000 $88,907,000 $94,812,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $5,237,000 (DC) X 7.0% $6,223,490 $6,636,840

Owner's cost $3,741,000 (DC) X 5.0% $4,445,350 $4,740,600

Construction management $7,481,000 (DC) X 10.0% $8,890,700 $9,481,200

Construction indirect $18,344,000 B&V labor market review $22,507,920 $23,903,411 6.

Start-up and spare parts $2,244,000 (DC) X 3.0% $2,667,210 $2,844,360

Performance test $200,000 Engineering estimate $200,000 $200,000Contingencies $14,962,000 (DC) X 20.0% $17,781,400 $18,962,400

Total indirect costs (IC) $52,209,000 $62,716,000 $66,769,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $14,118,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% $16,853,000 $16,853,000Loss Generation during Outage (GEN) $15,667,000 $15,667,000 $15,667,000

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) + (GEN) $156,805,000 $184,143,000 $194,101,000
10/22/2010 

B&V E-2 and E-4 15 

Table 8 - PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Updated Cost Analysis

Technology: Selective Catalytic Reduction - SJGS Unit 2 Date: 10/21/2010

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost BasisOriginal 2007 BART Cost Estimate

CAPITAL COST Escalation EscalationDirect Costs Current Value Comments on Updates to Oct 2010 Percentage

Purchased equipment costs

Anhydrous Ammonia Injection System $429,000 B&V cost estimate $429,000 $465,036 8.4%Anhydrous Ammonia Vaporization System $429,000 B&V cost estimate $429,000 $465,036 8.4%Reactor Box, Breeching and Ductwork $4,444,000 B&V cost estimate $3,999,600 Adjustement for ASTM A572 $4,447,555 11.2%

Ductwork Expansion Joints $294,000 B&V cost estimate $147,000 Correction $159,348 8.4%Catalyst $2,553,000 B&V cost estimate $2,553,000 $2,553,000 0.0%

Sonic Horns $188,000 B&V cost estimate $188,000 $203,792 8.4%Elevator $1,236,000 B&V cost estimate $1,236,000 $1,339,824 8.4%

Structural Steel $5,998,000 B&V cost estimate $5,998,000 $6,669,776 11.2%SCR Bypass $10,000,000 B&V cost estimate $10,000,000 $10,840,000 8.4%NOx Monitoring System $440,000 B&V cost estimate $440,000 $476,960 8.4%Electrical System Upgrade $372,000 B&V cost estimate $372,000 $403,248 8.4%Auxiliary Electric System Requirements $0 Not in estimate $6,400,000 Added, Refer to Sect. 3.0 $6,400,000 0.0%Instrumentation and Control System $278,000 B&V cost estimate $278,000 $301,352 8.4%

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $26,661,000 $32,469,600 $34,724,927

Gross Receipt Tax $1,650,000 (CC) X 6.2% $2,009,000 $2,149,000Freight $1,333,000 (CC) X 5.0% $1,623,000 $1,736,000

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $29,644,000 $36,102,000 $38,610,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $8,893,000 (PEC) X 30.0% $10,830,600 $11,502,097 6.2%

Handling & erection $11,858,000 (PEC) X 40.0% $14,440,800 $15,336,130 6.2%Electrical $4,447,000 (PEC) X 15.0% $5,415,300 $5,751,049 6.2%Piping $741,000 (PEC) X 2.5% $902,550 $958,508 6.2%

Insulation $2,964,000 (PEC) X 10.0% $3,610,200 $3,834,032 6.2%

Painting $296,000 (PEC) X 1.0% $361,020 $383,403 6.2%

Demolition $2,964,000 (PEC) X 10.0% $3,610,200 $3,834,032 6.2%

Relocation $1,482,000 (PEC) X 5.0% $1,805,100 $1,917,016 6.2%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $33,645,000 $40,975,770 $43,516,268

Air preheater modifications $1,071,000 B&V cost estimate $1,071,000 $1,160,964 8.4%Balanced draft conversion $13,366,000 B&V cost estimate $14,323,000 Refer to Section 4.0 $15,526,132 8.4%Site preparation $2,000,000 Engineering estimate $2,000,000 $2,000,000 0.0%

Buildings & enclosures $500,000 Engineering estimate $500,000 $500,000 0.0%

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $80,226,000 $94,972,000 $101,313,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $5,616,000 (DC) X 7.0% $6,648,040 $7,091,910

Owner's cost $4,011,000 (DC) X 5.0% $4,748,600 $5,065,650Construction management $8,023,000 (DC) X 10.0% $9,497,200 $10,131,300Construction indirect $22,085,000 B&V labor market review $26,895,990 $28,563,541 6.2%Start-up and spare parts $2,407,000 (DC) X 3.0% $2,849,160 $3,039,390Performance test $200,000 Engineering estimate $200,000 $200,000

Contingencies $16,045,000 (DC) X 20.0% $18,994,400 $20,262,600

Total indirect costs (IC) $58,387,000 $69,833,000 $74,354,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $15,407,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% $18,318,000 $18,318,000Loss Generation during Outage (GEN) $15,231,000 $15,667,000 $15,667,000

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) + (GEN) $169,251,000 $198,790,000 $209,652,000
10/22/2010 

B&V E-2 and E-4 16 

Table 9 - PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Updated Cost Analysis

Technology: Selective Catalytic Reduction - SJGS Unit 3 Date: 10/21/2010Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

Original 2007 BART Cost Estimate

CAPITAL COST Escalation EscalationDirect Costs Current Value Comments on Updates to Oct 2010 Percentage

Purchased equipment costs

Anhydrous Ammonia Injection System $559,000 B&V cost estimate $559,000 $605,956 8.4%Anhydrous Ammonia Vaporization System $559,000 B&V cost estimate $559,000 $605,956 8.4%Reactor Box, Breeching and Ductwork $5,613,000 B&V cost estimate $5,051,700 Adjustement for ASTM A572 $5,617,490 11.2%

Ductwork Expansion Joints $371,000 B&V cost estimate $185,500 Correction $201,082 8.4%

Catalyst $3,225,000 B&V cost estimate $3,225,000 $3,225,000 0.0%

Sonic Horns $188,000 B&V cost estimate $188,000 $203,792 8.4%Elevator $1,236,000 B&V cost estimate $1,236,000 $1,339,824 8.4%

SCR Bypass $10,000,000 B&V cost estimate $10,000,000 $11,120,000 11.2%Structural Steel $7,816,000 B&V cost estimate $7,816,000 $8,472,544 8.4%NOx Monitoring System $440,000 B&V cost estimate $440,000 $476,960 8.4%Electrical System Upgrade $484,000 B&V cost estimate $484,000 $524,656 8.4%Auxiliary Electric System Requirements $0 Not in estimate $8,350,000 Added, Refer to Sect. 3.0 $8,350,000 0.0%Instrumentation and Control System $291,000 B&V cost estimate $291,000 $315,444 8.4%

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $30,782,000 $38,385,200 $41,058,704

Gross Receipt Tax $1,905,000 (CC) X 6.2% $2,375,000 $2,541,000

Freight $1,539,000 (CC) X 5.0% $1,919,000 $2,053,000

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $34,226,000 $42,679,000 $45,653,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $10,268,000 (PEC) X 30.0% $12,803,700 $13,597,529 6.2%Handling & erection $13,690,000 (PEC) X 40.0% $17,071,600 $18,130,039 6.2%

Electrical $5,134,000 (PEC) X 15.0% $6,401,850 $6,798,765 6.2%

Piping $856,000 (PEC) X 2.5% $1,066,975 $1,133,127 6.2%Insulation $3,423,000 (PEC) X 10.0% $4,267,900 $4,532,510 6.2%

Painting $342,000 (PEC) X 1.0% $426,790 $453,251 6.2%Demolition $3,423,000 (PEC) X 10.0% $4,267,900 $4,532,510 6.2%

Relocation $1,711,000 (PEC) X 5.0% $2,133,950 $2,266,255 6.2%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $38,847,000 $48,440,665 $51,443,986

Air preheater modifications $8,685,000 B&V cost estimate $5,090,000 Correction $5,517,560 8.4%

Balanced draft conversion $17,122,000 B&V cost estimate $18,714,000 Refer to Section 4.0 $20,285,976 8.4%Site preparation $2,000,000 Engineering estimate $2,000,000 $2,000,000 0.0%

Buildings & enclosures $500,000 Engineering estimate $500,000 $500,000 0.0%

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $101,380,000 $117,424,000 $125,401,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $7,097,000 (DC) X 7.0% $8,219,680 $8,778,070

Owner's cost $5,069,000 (DC) X 5.0% $5,871,200 $6,270,050

Construction management $10,138,000 (DC) X 10.0% $11,742,400 $12,540,100

Construction indirect $25,498,000 B&V labor market review $31,795,855 $33,767,198 6.2%

Start-up and spare parts $3,041,000 (DC) X 3.0% $3,522,720 $3,762,030

Performance test $200,000 Engineering estimate $200,000 $200,000Contingencies $20,276,000 (DC) X 20.0% $23,484,800 $25,080,200

Total indirect costs (IC) $71,319,000 $84,837,000 $90,398,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $19,195,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% $22,481,000 $22,481,000Loss Generation during Outage (GEN) $23,674,000 $23,674,000 $23,674,000

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) + (GEN) $215,568,000 $248,416,000 $261,954,000
10/22/2010 

B&V E-2 and E-4 17 

Table 10 - PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Updated Cost Analysis

Technology: Selective Catalytic Reduction - SJGS Unit 4 Date: 10/21/2010

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost BasisOriginal 2007 BART Cost Estimate

CAPITAL COST Escalation EscalationDirect Costs Current Value Comments on Updates to Oct 2010 Percentage

Purchased equipment costs

Anhydrous Ammonia Injection System $559,000 B&V cost estimate $559,000 $605,956 8.4%Anhydrous Ammonia Vaporization System $559,000 B&V cost estimate $559,000 $605,956 8.4%Reactor Box, Breeching and Ductwork $5,648,000 B&V cost estimate $5,083,200 Adjustement for ASTM A572 $5,652,518 11.2%

Ductwork Expansion Joints $373,000 B&V cost estimate $186,500 Correction $202,166 8.4%

Catalyst $3,245,000 B&V cost estimate $3,245,000 $3,245,000 0.0%

Sonic Horns $188,000 B&V cost estimate $188,000 $203,792 8.4%Elevator $1,236,000 B&V cost estimate $1,236,000 $1,339,824 8.4%

Structural Steel $6,252,000 B&V cost estimate $6,252,000 $6,952,224 11.2%

SCR Bypass $10,000,000 B&V cost estimate $10,000,000 $10,840,000 8.4%

NOx Monitoring System $440,000 B&V cost estimate $440,000 $476,960 8.4%Electrical System Upgrade $484,000 B&V cost estimate $484,000 $524,656 8.4%Auxiliary Electric System Requirements $0 Not in estimate $8,350,000 Added, Refer to Sect. 3.0 $8,350,000 0.0%Instrumentation and Control System $291,000 B&V cost estimate $291,000 $315,444 8.4%

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $29,275,000 $36,873,700 $39,314,496

Gross Receipt Tax $1,811,000 (CC) X 6.2% $2,282,000 $2,433,000

Freight $1,464,000 (CC) X 5.0% $1,844,000 $1,966,000

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $32,550,000 $41,000,000 $43,713,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $9,765,000 (PEC) X 30.0% $12,300,000 $13,062,600 6.2%

Handling & erection $9,765,000 (PEC) X 30.0% $12,300,000 $13,062,600 6.2%

Electrical $4,883,000 (PEC) X 15.0% $6,150,000 $6,531,300 6.2%

Piping $814,000 (PEC) X 2.5% $1,025,000 $1,088,550 6.2%

Insulation $3,255,000 (PEC) X 10.0% $4,100,000 $4,354,200 6.2%Painting $326,000 (PEC) X 1.0% $410,000 $435,420 6.2%Demolition $3,255,000 (PEC) X 10.0% $4,100,000 $4,354,200 6.2%

Relocation $1,628,000 (PEC) X 5.0% $2,050,000 $2,177,100 6.2%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $33,691,000 $42,435,000 $45,065,970

Air preheater modifications $8,685,000 B&V cost estimate $5,090,000 Correction $5,517,560 8.4%

Balanced draft conversion $17,122,000 B&V cost estimate $18,714,000 Refer to Section 4.0 $20,285,976 8.4%Site preparation $2,000,000 Engineering estimate $2,000,000 $2,000,000 0.0%

Buildings & enclosures $500,000 Engineering estimate $500,000 $500,000 0.0%

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $94,548,000 $109,739,000 $117,083,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $6,618,000 (DC) X 7.0% $7,681,730 $8,195,810

Owner's cost $4,727,000 (DC) X 5.0% $5,486,950 $5,854,150Construction management $9,455,000 (DC) X 10.0% $10,973,900 $11,708,300Construction indirect $20,996,000 B&V labor market review $26,445,000 $28,084,590 6.2%Start-up and spare parts $2,836,000 (DC) X 3.0% $3,292,170 $3,512,490

Performance test $200,000 Engineering estimate $200,000 $200,000Contingencies $18,910,000 (DC) X 20.0% $21,947,800 $23,416,600

Total indirect costs (IC) $63,742,000 $76,028,000 $80,972,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $17,594,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% $20,648,000 $20,648,000Loss Generation during Outage (GEN) $23,674,000 $23,674,000 $23,674,000

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) + (GEN) $199,558,000 $230,089,000 $242,377,000
10/22/2010 

B&V E-2 and E-4 

Appendix A 

Data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 
Subscribe to E-mail Updates: Enter E-mail Address SUBSCRIBE

A to Z Index | Site Map | FAQs | About BLS | Contact Us

Search: 

Home Subject Areas Databases & Tables Publications Economic Releases

What's New | Release Calendar 

Databases, Tables & Calculators by Subject FONT SIZE:

Change 

Output 

Options:

From: 2007 To: 2010 

include graphs 

Data extracted on: October 20, 2010 (4:43:35 PM)

Producer Price Index Industry Data

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual

2007 118.3 118.3 119.6 118.9 119.2 119.8 119.8 120.9 120.9 120.9 121.7 124.3 120.2

2008 130.1 136.7 137.3 139.0 143.3 146.6 148.4 152.4 151.3 151.7 151.2 151.0 144.9

2009 148.4 145.8 143.5 141.7 138.6 136.5 136.0 135.8 136.7 136.8 134.3 134.6 139.1

2010 134.7 135.0 135.1 136.2 136.9 136.7(P) 136.3(P) 136.2(P) 137.5(P) 

P : Preliminary. All indexes are subject to revision four months after original publication. 

Series Id: PCU332313332313 

Industry: Plate work manufacturing 

Product: Plate work manufacturing 

Base Date: 200312 

Download:

Beta

TOP PICKS SERIES REPORT DISCONTINUED DATABASES FAQs SPECIAL NOTICES MORE SOURCES OF DATA 

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data Page 1 of 2

http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet 10/20/2010
Subscribe to E-mail Updates: Enter E-mail Address SUBSCRIBE

A to Z Index | Site Map | FAQs | About BLS | Contact Us

Search: 

Home Subject Areas Databases & Tables Publications Economic Releases

What's New | Release Calendar 

Databases, Tables & Calculators by Subject FONT SIZE:

Change 

Output 

Options:

From: 2007 To: 2010 

include graphs 

Data extracted on: October 20, 2010 (10:24:46 AM)

Producer Price Index Industry Data

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual

2007 153.5 147.6 148.9 154.6 160.8 162.6 166.8 170.3 167.0 169.8 168.5 164.9 161.3

2008 165.8 167.2 175.5 175.4 176.8 174.1 175.9 173.9 171.9 163.4 148.5 146.8 167.9

2009 143.2 142.1 141.2 148.6 153.8 154.6 156.5 159.7 161.2 162.3 164.7 169.8 154.8

2010 169.7 172.5 169.6 173.3 173.6 170.5(P) 169.2(P) 169.7(P) 166.1(P) 

P : Preliminary. All indexes are subject to revision four months after original publication. 

Series Id: PCU33592-33592- 

Industry: Communication & energy wire & cable mfg 

Product: Communication & energy wire & cable mfg 

Base Date: 200312 

Download:

Beta

TOP PICKS SERIES REPORT DISCONTINUED DATABASES FAQs SPECIAL NOTICES MORE SOURCES OF DATA 

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data Page 1 of 2

http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet 10/20/2010
Subscribe to E-mail Updates: Enter E-mail Address SUBSCRIBE

A to Z Index | Site Map | FAQs | About BLS | Contact Us

Search: 

Home Subject Areas Databases & Tables Publications Economic Releases

What's New | Release Calendar 

Databases, Tables & Calculators by Subject FONT SIZE:

Change 

Output 

Options:

From: 2007 To: 2010 

include graphs 

Data extracted on: October 20, 2010 (10:35:04 AM)

Producer Price Index Industry Data

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual

2007 169.4 167.2 168.6 169.8 170.1 169.1 168.8 168.1 167.0 167.1 165.3 166.7 168.1

2008 170.2 176.1 186.0 197.2 207.9 218.9 223.0 225.8 227.7 228.8 214.1 203.0 206.6

2009 182.8 177.4 172.9 161.6 158.1 152.2 153.2 157.3 164.1 166.1 164.8 166.2 164.7

2010 170.8 174.7 185.0 190.0 195.7 194.0(P) 196.6(P) 193.7(P) 195.7(P) 

P : Preliminary. All indexes are subject to revision four months after original publication. 

Series Id: PCU33121-33121- 

Industry: Iron/steel pipe & tube mfg from purch steel 

Product: Iron/steel pipe & tube mfg from purch steel 

Base Date: 200312 

Download:

Beta

TOP PICKS SERIES REPORT DISCONTINUED DATABASES FAQs SPECIAL NOTICES MORE SOURCES OF DATA 

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data Page 1 of 2

http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet 10/20/2010
Subscribe to E-mail Updates: Enter E-mail Address SUBSCRIBE

A to Z Index | Site Map | FAQs | About BLS | Contact Us

Search: 

Home Subject Areas Databases & Tables Publications Economic Releases

What's New | Release Calendar 

Databases, Tables & Calculators by Subject FONT SIZE:

Change 

Output 

Options:

From: 2007 To: 2010 

include graphs 

Data extracted on: October 20, 2010 (10:36:26 AM)

Producer Price Index Industry Data

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual

2007 115.2 116.3 116.7 117.6 117.9 118.0 118.1 118.4 118.6 119.1 119.3 119.5 117.9

2008 120.9 121.5 122.0 121.9 122.4 122.9 123.8 124.8 125.8 125.6 126.0 126.2 123.6

2009 127.0 127.0 127.0 127.2 127.2 127.4 127.7 127.6 127.9 127.8 127.8 127.9 127.5

2010 128.2 128.2 128.4 128.4 128.8 128.7(P) 129.0(P) 129.4(P) 129.7(P) 

P : Preliminary. All indexes are subject to revision four months after original publication. 

Series Id: PCU33391-33391- 

Industry: Pump and compressor manufacturing 

Product: Pump and compressor manufacturing 

Base Date: 200312 

Download:

Beta

TOP PICKS SERIES REPORT DISCONTINUED DATABASES FAQs SPECIAL NOTICES MORE SOURCES OF DATA 

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data Page 1 of 2

http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet 10/20/2010
Subscribe to E-mail Updates: Enter E-mail Address SUBSCRIBE

A to Z Index | Site Map | FAQs | About BLS | Contact Us

Search: 

Home Subject Areas Databases & Tables Publications Economic Releases

What's New | Release Calendar 

Databases, Tables & Calculators by Subject FONT SIZE:

Change 

Output 

Options:

From: 2007 To: 2010 

include graphs 

Data extracted on: October 20, 2010 (10:38:09 AM)

Producer Price Index Industry Data

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual

2007 175.2 177.1 178.4 179.1 179.1 179.2 179.6 177.7 181.7 181.3 182.1 182.5 179.4

2008 180.9 183.3 183.7 185.3 184.8 186.7 188.5 191.1 190.7 191.8 191.0 192.3 187.5

2009 193.9 190.4 193.2 194.7 190.6 191.7 191.7 193.8 193.6 194.2 194.6 194.5 193.1

2010 194.2 193.4 194.5 194.7 194.2 196.2(P) 194.6(P) 195.5(P) 195.2(P) 

P : Preliminary. All indexes are subject to revision four months after original publication. 

Series Id: PCU335313335313 

Industry: Switchgear and switchboard apparatus mfg 

Product: Switchgear and switchboard apparatus mfg 

Base Date: 198506 

Download:

Beta

TOP PICKS SERIES REPORT DISCONTINUED DATABASES FAQs SPECIAL NOTICES MORE SOURCES OF DATA 

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data Page 1 of 2

http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet 10/20/2010
Subscribe to E-mail Updates: Enter E-mail Address SUBSCRIBE

A to Z Index | Site Map | FAQs | About BLS | Contact Us

Search: 

Home Subject Areas Databases & Tables Publications Economic Releases

What's New | Release Calendar 

Databases, Tables & Calculators by Subject FONT SIZE:

Change 

Output 

Options:

From: 2007 To: 2010 

include graphs 

Data extracted on: October 20, 2010 (10:27:59 AM)

Producer Price Index Industry Data

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual

2007 128.8 129.3 131.0 131.4 132.6 132.6 132.8 133.3 133.5 133.9 134.3 134.4 132.3

2008 134.6 136.9 138.1 140.3 142.6 144.4 145.5 147.3 147.1 147.6 147.0 146.8 143.2

2009 146.5 145.8 145.6 143.4 142.5 141.2 140.9 140.5 140.2 140.4 140.3 140.2 142.3

2010 139.2 139.1 139.1 140.1 140.5 141.1(P) 141.0(P) 141.0(P) 140.8(P) 

P : Preliminary. All indexes are subject to revision four months after original publication. 

Series Id: PCU33242-33242- 

Industry: Metal tank (heavy gauge) mfg 

Product: Metal tank (heavy gauge) mfg 

Base Date: 200312 

Download:

Beta

TOP PICKS SERIES REPORT DISCONTINUED DATABASES FAQs SPECIAL NOTICES MORE SOURCES OF DATA 

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data Page 1 of 2

http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet 10/20/2010
Subscribe to E-mail Updates: Enter E-mail Address SUBSCRIBE

A to Z Index | Site Map | FAQs | About BLS | Contact Us

Search: 

Home Subject Areas Databases & Tables Publications Economic Releases

What's New | Release Calendar 

Databases, Tables & Calculators by Subject FONT SIZE:

Change 

Output 

Options:

From: 2007 To: 2010 

Data extracted on: October 20, 2010 (11:44:21 AM)

Employer Costs for Employee Compensation

Year Period Cost of compensation (Cost per hour worked) Percent of total compensation

2007 Qtr1 29.02 100.0

2007 Qtr2 29.48 100.0

2007 Qtr3 29.77 100.0

2007 Qtr4 29.88 100.0

2008 Qtr1 30.33 100.0

2008 Qtr2 30.60 100.0

2008 Qtr3 30.92 100.0

2008 Qtr4 31.21 100.0

2009 Qtr1 31.33 100.0

2009 Qtr2 31.53 100.0

2009 Qtr3 31.65 100.0

2009 Qtr4 30.99 100.0

2010 Qtr1 31.20 100.0

2010 Qtr2 31.43 100.0

V : See www.bls.gov/ncs/ect/mapnote.htm for details regarding the Farming, fishing, and forestry series. 

Series Id: CMU1010000405000D,CMU1010000405000P (V) 

Compensation Component: Total compensation 

Employer/Employee Charac.: Construction, extraction, farming, fishing, and forestry occupations

Sector: All Civilian 

Download:

Beta

TOP PICKS SERIES REPORT DISCONTINUED DATABASES FAQs SPECIAL NOTICES MORE SOURCES OF DATA 

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data Page 1 of 2

http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet 10/20/2010
10/22/2010 

B&V E-2 and E-4 

Appendix B 

Draft System Pressure Curves 
10/22/2010 

B&V E-2 and E-4 
10/22/2010 

B&V E-2 and E-4 
02/09/11 

Attachment 4 

Updated Costs for ROFA, ROFA/Rotamix, Rotamix, and 

SCR/SNCR Hybrid Systems 
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Escalated to Fourth Quarter 2010 Dollars

Technology: SNCR/SCR Hybrid - SJGS Unit 1 Date: 2/8/2011

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST Estimate Escalation Escalation

Direct Costs in 2007 Dollars Taken from 2007 BART 4th Qrtr 2010 Percentage

Purchased equipment costs

Hybrid system scope: $15,753,000 B&V cost development from vendor quote $17,076,000 8.4%

Reagent delivery system

Wall injectors and multiple nozzle lances

Automatic injector and lance retract system

Flue gas temperature, NOx monitors

Reagent storage tank

Single layer catalyst SCR system

Ductwork modifications

Electrical system upgrades $378,000 Similar scope to SCR modifications $410,000 8.4%

Instrumentation and control system $279,000 Similar scope to SCR modifications $302,000 8.4%

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $16,410,000 $17,788,000

Gross Receipt Tax $1,015,000 (CC) X 6.2% $1,101,000

Freight $821,000 (CC) X 5.0% $889,000

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $18,246,000 $19,778,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $3,649,000 (PEC) X 20.0% $3,875,000 6.2%

Handling & erection $5,474,000 (PEC) X 30.0% $5,813,000 6.2%

Electrical $2,737,000 (PEC) X 15.0% $2,907,000 6.2%

Piping $456,000 (PEC) X 2.5% $484,000 6.2%

Insulation $1,825,000 (PEC) X 10.0% $1,938,000 6.2%

Painting $182,000 (PEC) X 1.0% $193,000 6.2%

Demolition $1,825,000 (PEC) X 10.0% $1,938,000 6.2%

Relocation $912,000 (PEC) X 5.0% $969,000 6.2%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $17,060,000 $18,117,000

Air preheater modifications $1,071,000 B&V cost estimate $1,161,000 8.4%

Balanced draft conversion $13,366,000 B&V cost estimate $14,489,000 8.4%

Site preparation $1,000,000 Engineering estimate $1,000,000 0.0%

Buildings $200,000 Engineering estimate $200,000 0.0%

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $50,943,000 $54,745,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $3,566,000 (DC) X 7.0% $3,832,000

Owner's cost $2,547,000 (DC) X 5.0% $2,737,000

Construction management $5,094,000 (DC) X 10.0% $5,475,000

Construction indirect $11,222,000 B&V labor market review $11,918,000 6.2%

Start-up and spare parts $1,528,000 (DC) X 3.0% $1,642,000

Performance test $509,000 (DC) X 1.0% $547,000

Contingencies $10,189,000 (DC) X 20.0% $10,949,000

Total indirect costs (IC) $34,655,000 $37,100,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $3,171,000 $3,171,000

Loss Generation during Outage (GEN) $15,667,000 $15,667,000

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (GEN) $104,436,000 $110,683,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated manpower level

Maintenance labor & materials $1,528,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $1,653,000

Variable annual costs

Urea $1,703,000 1,089 lb/hr and 420 $/ton Engineering estimate

Water $1,762,000 252 gpm and 15.67 $/1,000 gal Engineering estimate

Catalyst replacement $215,000 33 m3 and 6,500 $/m3 2 yr catalyst replacement rate

Auxiliary power $32,000 70 kW and 0.06095 $/kWh Engineering estimate

ID fan power $670,000 1,477 kW and 0.06095 $/kWh Engineering estimate

Total variable annual costs $4,382,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $6,035,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $10,781,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $10,781,000 Calculated from escalated costs

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $16,816,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Escalated to Fourth Quarter 2010 Dollars

Technology: SNCR/SCR Hybrid - SJGS Unit 2 Date: 2/8/2011

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST Estimate Escalation Escalation

Direct Costs in 2007 Dollars Taken from 2007 BART 4th Qrtr 2010 Percentage

Purchased equipment costs

Hybrid system scope: $15,753,000 B&V cost development from vendor quote $17,076,000 8.4%

Reagent delivery system

Wall injectors and multiple nozzle lances

Automatic injector and lance retract system

Flue gas temperature, NOx monitors

Reagent storage tank

Single layer catalyst SCR system

Ductwork modifications

Electrical system upgrades $372,000 Similar scope to SCR modifications $403,000 8.4%

Instrumentation and control system $278,000 Similar scope to SCR modifications $301,000 8.4%

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $16,403,000 $17,780,000

Gross Receipt Tax $1,015,000 (CC) X 6.2% $1,100,000

Freight $820,000 (CC) X 5.0% $889,000

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $18,238,000 $19,769,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $3,648,000 (PEC) X 20.0% $3,874,000 6.2%

Handling & erection $7,295,000 (PEC) X 40.0% $7,747,000 6.2%

Electrical $2,736,000 (PEC) X 15.0% $2,906,000 6.2%

Piping $456,000 (PEC) X 2.5% $484,000 6.2%

Insulation $1,824,000 (PEC) X 10.0% $1,937,000 6.2%

Painting $182,000 (PEC) X 1.0% $193,000 6.2%

Demolition $1,824,000 (PEC) X 10.0% $1,937,000 6.2%

Relocation $912,000 (PEC) X 5.0% $969,000 6.2%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $18,877,000 $20,047,000

Air preheater modifications $1,071,000 B&V cost estimate $1,161,000 8.4%

Balanced draft conversion $13,366,000 B&V cost estimate $14,489,000 8.4%

Site preparation $1,000,000 Engineering estimate $1,000,000 0.0%

Buildings $200,000 Engineering estimate $200,000 0.0%

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $52,752,000 $56,666,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $3,693,000 (DC) X 7.0% $3,967,000

Owner's cost $2,638,000 (DC) X 5.0% $2,833,000

Construction management $5,275,000 (DC) X 10.0% $5,667,000

Construction indirect $13,041,000 B&V labor market review $13,850,000 6.2%

Start-up and spare parts $1,583,000 (DC) X 3.0% $1,700,000

Performance test $528,000 (DC) X 1.0% $567,000

Contingencies $10,550,000 (DC) X 20.0% $11,333,000

Total indirect costs (IC) $37,308,000 $39,917,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $3,337,000 $3,337,000

Loss Generation during Outage (GEN) $15,231,000 $15,231,000

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (GEN) $108,628,000 $115,151,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated manpower level

Maintenance labor & materials $1,583,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $1,708,000

Variable annual costs

Urea $1,703,000 1,089 lb/hr and 420 $/ton Engineering estimate

Water $1,762,000 252 gpm and 15.67 $/1,000 gal Engineering estimate

Catalyst replacement $215,000 33 m3 and 6,500 $/m3 2 yr catalyst replacement rate

Auxiliary power $32,000 70 kW and 0.06095 $/kWh Engineering estimate

ID fan power $670,000 1,477 kW and 0.06095 $/kWh Engineering estimate

Total variable annual costs $4,382,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $6,090,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $11,216,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $11,216,000 Calculated from escalated costs

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $17,306,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Escalated to Fourth Quarter 2010 Dollars

Technology: SNCR/SCR Hybrid - SJGS Unit 3 Date: 2/8/2011

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST Estimate Escalation Escalation

Direct Costs in 2007 Dollars Taken from 2007 BART 4th Qrtr 2010 Percentage

Purchased equipment costs

Hybrid system scope: $23,680,000 B&V cost development from vendor quote $25,669,000 8.4%

Reagent delivery system

Wall injectors and multiple nozzle lances

Automatic injector and lance retract system

Flue gas temperature, NOx monitors

Reagent storage tank

Single layer catalyst SCR system

Ductwork modifications

Electrical system upgrades $484,000 Similar scope to SCR modifications $525,000 8.4%

Instrumentation and control system $291,000 Similar scope to SCR modifications $315,000 8.4%

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $24,455,000 $26,509,000

Gross Receipt Tax $1,513,000 (CC) X 6.2% $1,640,000

Freight $1,223,000 (CC) X 5.0% $1,325,000

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $27,191,000 $29,474,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $5,438,000 (PEC) X 20.0% $5,775,000 6.2%

Handling & erection $10,876,000 (PEC) X 40.0% $11,550,000 6.2%

Electrical $4,079,000 (PEC) X 15.0% $4,332,000 6.2%

Piping $680,000 (PEC) X 2.5% $722,000 6.2%

Insulation $2,719,000 (PEC) X 10.0% $2,888,000 6.2%

Painting $272,000 (PEC) X 1.0% $289,000 6.2%

Demolition $2,719,000 (PEC) X 10.0% $2,888,000 6.2%

Relocation $1,360,000 (PEC) X 5.0% $1,444,000 6.2%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $28,143,000 $29,888,000

Air preheater modifications $8,685,000 B&V cost estimate $9,415,000 8.4%

Balanced draft conversion $17,122,000 B&V cost estimate $18,560,000 8.4%

Site preparation $1,000,000 Engineering estimate $1,000,000 0.0%

Buildings $200,000 Engineering estimate $200,000 0.0%

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $82,341,000 $88,537,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $5,764,000 (DC) X 7.0% $6,198,000

Owner's cost $4,117,000 (DC) X 5.0% $4,427,000

Construction management $8,234,000 (DC) X 10.0% $8,854,000

Construction indirect $19,442,000 B&V labor market review $20,647,000 6.2%

Start-up and spare parts $2,470,000 (DC) X 3.0% $2,656,000

Performance test $823,000 (DC) X 1.0% $885,000

Contingencies $16,468,000 (DC) X 20.0% $17,707,000

Total indirect costs (IC) $57,318,000 $61,374,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $5,174,000 $5,174,000

Loss Generation during Outage (GEN) $23,674,000 $23,674,000

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (GEN) $168,507,000 $178,759,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated manpower level

Maintenance labor & materials $2,470,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $2,595,000

Variable annual costs

Urea $2,641,000 1,689 lb/hr and 420 $/ton Engineering estimate

Water $2,658,000 380 gpm and 15.67 $/1,000 gal Engineering estimate

Catalyst replacement $270,000 42 m3 and 6,500 $/m3 2 yr catalyst replacement rate

Auxiliary power $32,000 70 kW and 0.06095 $/kWh Engineering estimate

ID fan power $997,000 2,197 kW and 0.06095 $/kWh Engineering estimate

Total variable annual costs $6,598,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $9,193,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $17,411,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $17,411,000 Calculated from escalated costs

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $26,604,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Escalated to Fourth Quarter 2010 Dollars

Technology: SNCR/SCR Hybrid - SJGS Unit 4 Date: 2/8/2011

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST Estimate Escalation Escalation

Direct Costs in 2007 Dollars Taken from 2007 BART 4th Qrtr 2010 Percentage

Purchased equipment costs

Hybrid system scope: $23,680,000 B&V cost development from vendor quote $25,669,000 8.4%

Reagent delivery system

Wall injectors and multiple nozzle lances

Automatic injector and lance retract system

Flue gas temperature, NOx monitors

Reagent storage tank

Single layer catalyst SCR system

Ductwork modifications

Electrical system upgrades $484,000 Similar scope to SCR modifications $525,000 8.4%

Instrumentation and control system $291,000 Similar scope to SCR modifications $315,000 8.4%

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $24,455,000 $26,509,000

Gross Receipt Tax $1,513,000 (CC) X 6.2% $1,640,000

Freight $1,223,000 (CC) X 5.0% $1,325,000

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $27,191,000 $29,474,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $5,438,000 (PEC) X 20.0% $5,775,000 6.2%

Handling & erection $8,157,000 (PEC) X 30.0% $8,663,000 6.2%

Electrical $4,079,000 (PEC) X 15.0% $4,332,000 6.2%

Piping $680,000 (PEC) X 2.5% $722,000 6.2%

Insulation $2,719,000 (PEC) X 10.0% $2,888,000 6.2%

Painting $272,000 (PEC) X 1.0% $289,000 6.2%

Demolition $2,719,000 (PEC) X 10.0% $2,888,000 6.2%

Relocation $1,360,000 (PEC) X 5.0% $1,444,000 6.2%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $25,424,000 $27,001,000

Air preheater modifications $8,685,000 B&V cost estimate $9,415,000 8.4%

Balanced draft conversion $17,122,000 B&V cost estimate $18,560,000 8.4%

Site preparation $1,000,000 Engineering estimate $1,000,000 0.0%

Buildings $200,000 Engineering estimate $200,000 0.0%

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $79,622,000 $85,650,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $5,574,000 (DC) X 7.0% $5,996,000

Owner's cost $3,981,000 (DC) X 5.0% $4,283,000

Construction management $7,962,000 (DC) X 10.0% $8,565,000

Construction indirect $16,723,000 B&V labor market review $17,760,000 6.2%

Start-up and spare parts $2,389,000 (DC) X 3.0% $2,570,000

Performance test $796,000 (DC) X 1.0% $857,000

Contingencies $15,924,000 (DC) X 20.0% $17,130,000

Total indirect costs (IC) $53,349,000 $57,161,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $4,927,000 $4,927,000

Loss Generation during Outage (GEN) $23,674,000 $23,674,000

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (GEN) $161,572,000 $171,412,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated manpower level

Maintenance labor & materials $2,389,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $2,514,000

Variable annual costs

Urea $2,641,000 1,689 lb/hr and 420 $/ton Engineering estimate

Water $2,658,000 380 gpm and 15.67 $/1,000 gal Engineering estimate

Catalyst replacement $270,000 42 m3 and 6,500 $/m3 2 yr catalyst replacement rate

Auxiliary power $32,000 70 kW and 0.06095 $/kWh Engineering estimate

ID fan power $997,000 2,197 kW and 0.06095 $/kWh Engineering estimate

Total variable annual costs $6,598,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $9,112,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $16,696,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $16,696,000 Calculated from escalated costs

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $25,808,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Escalated to Fourth Quarter 2010 Dollars

Technology: ROFA - Unit 1 Date: 8/15/2008

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST Estimate Escalation Escalation

Direct Costs in 2008 Dollars Taken from 2008 BART 4th Qrtr 2010 Percentage

Purchased equipment costs

ROFA system scope: $6,681,000 Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 $7,075,000 5.9%

ROFA fan

ROFA ports with boiler tube bends

ROFA ductwork

Instrumentation for ROFA

Contingency for combustion system modifications $125,000 Estimated cost based on 8/15/08 phone call with Nalco Mobotec $132,000 5.9%

NOx monitoring system $220,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes $233,000 5.9%

Electrical system upgrades $1,159,000 New transformer and electrical upgrades for new ROFA booster fans $1,227,000 5.9%

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $8,185,000 $8,667,000

Gross Receipt Tax $506,447 (CC) X 6.2% $536,271

Freight $409,250 (CC) X 5.0% $433,350

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $9,101,000 $9,637,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $252,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes $261,000 3.6%

Handling & erection $1,843,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes $1,909,000 3.6%

Electrical $435,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes $451,000 3.6%

Piping included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Insulation included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Painting included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Demolition $301,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes $312,000 3.6%

Relocation $455,000 (PEC) X 5.0% $471,000 3.6%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $3,286,000 $3,404,000

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $12,387,000 $13,041,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $1,239,000 (DC) X 10.0% $1,304,000

Owner's cost $619,000 (DC) X 5.0% $652,000

Construction management $619,000 (DC) X 5.0% $652,000

Start-up and spare parts $248,000 (DC) X 2.0% $261,000

Performance test $50,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate $50,000 No escalation

Contingencies $2,477,000 (DC) X 20.0% $2,608,000

Total indirect costs (IC) $5,252,000 $5,527,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $654,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2) $688,000

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $18,293,000 $19,256,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Maintenance labor and materials $310,000 (DC) X 2.5%

Total fixed annual costs $310,000

Variable annual costs

Auxiliary and ID fan power $1,363,000 3000 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Nalco Mobotec prop.

Total variable annual costs $1,363,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $1,673,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $1,876,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $1,876,000 Calculated from escalated costs

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $3,549,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Escalated to Fourth Quarter 2010 Dollars

Technology: ROFA - Unit 2 Date: 2/8/2011

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST Estimate Escalation Escalation

Direct Costs in 2008 Dollars Taken from 2008 BART 4th Qrtr 2010 Percentage

Purchased equipment costs

ROFA system scope: $6,681,000 Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 $7,075,000 5.9%

ROFA fan

ROFA ports with boiler tube bends

ROFA ductwork

Instrumentation for ROFA

Contingency for combustion system modifications $125,000 Estimated cost based on 8/15/08 phone call with Nalco Mobotec $132,000 5.9%

NOx monitoring system $220,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes $233,000 5.9%

Electrical system upgrades $1,159,000 New transformer and electrical upgrades for new ROFA booster fans $1,227,000 5.9%

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $8,185,000 $8,667,000

Gross Receipt Tax $506,447 (CC) X 6.2% $536,271

Freight $409,250 (CC) X 5.0% $433,350

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $9,101,000 $9,637,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $252,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes $261,000 3.6%

Handling & erection $1,843,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes $1,909,000 3.6%

Electrical $435,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes $451,000 3.6%

Piping included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Insulation included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Painting included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Demolition $301,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes $312,000 3.6%

Relocation $455,000 (PEC) X 5.0% $471,000 3.6%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $3,286,000 $3,404,000

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $12,387,000 $13,041,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $1,239,000 (DC) X 10.0% $1,304,000

Owner's cost $619,000 (DC) X 5.0% $652,000

Construction management $619,000 (DC) X 5.0% $652,000

Start-up and spare parts $248,000 (DC) X 2.0% $261,000

Performance test $50,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate $50,000 No escalation

Contingencies $2,477,000 (DC) X 20.0% $2,608,000

Total indirect costs (IC) $5,252,000 $5,527,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $654,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2) $688,000

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $18,293,000 $19,256,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Maintenance labor and materials $310,000 (DC) X 2.5%

Total fixed annual costs $310,000

Variable annual costs

Auxiliary and ID fan power $1,363,000 3000 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Nalco Mobotec prop.

Total variable annual costs $1,363,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $1,673,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $1,876,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $1,876,000 Calculated from escalated costs

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $3,549,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Escalated to Fourth Quarter 2010 Dollars

Technology: ROFA - Unit 3 Date: 2/8/2011

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST Estimate Escalation Escalation

Direct Costs in 2008 Dollars Taken from 2008 BART 4th Qrtr 2010 Percentage

Purchased equipment costs

ROFA system scope: $7,651,000 Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 $8,102,000 5.9%

ROFA fan

ROFA ports with boiler tube bends

ROFA ductwork

Instrumentation for ROFA

Contingency for combustion system modifications $125,000 Estimated cost based on 8/15/08 phone call with Nalco Mobotec $132,000 5.9%

NOx monitoring system $220,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes $233,000 5.9%

Electrical system upgrades $1,214,000 New transformer and electrical upgrades for new ROFA booster fans $1,286,000 5.9%

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $9,210,000 $9,753,000

Gross Receipt Tax $569,869 (CC) X 6.2% $603,467

Freight $460,500 (CC) X 5.0% $487,650

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $10,240,000 $10,844,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $328,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes $340,000 3.6%

Handling & erection $2,152,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes $2,229,000 3.6%

Electrical $585,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes $606,000 3.6%

Piping included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Insulation included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Painting included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Demolition $396,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes $410,000 3.6%

Relocation $512,000 (PEC) X 5.0% $530,000 3.6%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $3,973,000 $4,115,000

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $14,213,000 $14,959,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $1,421,000 (DC) X 10.0% $1,496,000

Owner's cost $711,000 (DC) X 5.0% $748,000

Construction management $711,000 (DC) X 5.0% $748,000

Start-up and spare parts $284,000 (DC) X 2.0% $299,000

Performance test $50,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate $50,000 No escalation

Contingencies $2,843,000 (DC) X 20.0% $2,992,000

Total indirect costs (IC) $6,020,000 $6,333,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $750,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2) $789,000

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $20,983,000 $22,081,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Maintenance labor and materials $355,000 (DC) X 2.5%

Total fixed annual costs $355,000

Variable annual costs

Auxiliary and ID fan power $2,725,000 6000 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Nalco-Mobotec prop.

Total variable annual costs $2,725,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $3,080,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $2,151,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $2,151,000 Calculated from escalated costs

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $5,231,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Escalated to Fourth Quarter 2010 Dollars

Technology: ROFA - Unit 4 Date: 2/8/2011

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST Estimate Escalation Escalation

Direct Costs in 2008 Dollars Taken from 2008 BART 4th Qrtr 2010 Percentage

Purchased equipment costs

ROFA system scope: $7,651,000 Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 $8,102,000 5.9%

ROFA fan

ROFA ports with boiler tube bends

ROFA ductwork

Instrumentation for ROFA

Contingency for combustion system modifications $125,000 Estimated cost based on 8/15/08 phone call with Nalco Mobotec $132,000 5.9%

NOx monitoring system $220,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes $233,000 5.9%

Electrical system upgrades $1,214,000 New transformer and electrical upgrades for new ROFA booster fans $1,286,000 5.9%

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $9,210,000 $9,753,000

Gross Receipt Tax $569,869 (CC) X 6.2% $603,467

Freight $460,500 (CC) X 5.0% $487,650

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $10,240,000 $10,844,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $328,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes $340,000 3.6%

Handling & erection $2,152,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes $2,229,000 3.6%

Electrical $585,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes $606,000 3.6%

Piping included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Insulation included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Painting included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Demolition $396,000 B&V cost estimate - see estimating notes $410,000 3.6%

Relocation $512,000 (PEC) X 5.0% $530,000 3.6%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $3,973,000 $4,115,000

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $14,213,000 $14,959,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $1,421,000 (DC) X 10.0% $1,496,000

Owner's cost $711,000 (DC) X 5.0% $748,000

Construction management $711,000 (DC) X 5.0% $748,000

Start-up and spare parts $284,000 (DC) X 2.0% $299,000

Performance test $50,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate $50,000 No escalation

Contingencies $2,843,000 (DC) X 20.0% $2,992,000

Total indirect costs (IC) $6,020,000 $6,333,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $750,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2) $789,000

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $20,983,000 $22,081,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Maintenance labor and materials $355,000 (DC) X 2.5%

Total fixed annual costs $355,000

Variable annual costs

Auxiliary and ID fan power $2,725,000 6000 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Nalco-Mobotec pro

Total variable annual costs $2,725,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $3,080,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $2,151,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $2,151,000 Calculated from escalated costs

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $5,231,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Escalated to Fourth Quarter 2010 Dollars

Technology: Rotamix - SJGS Unit 1 Date: 2/8/2011

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST Estimate Escalation Escalation

Direct Costs in 2008 Dollars Taken from 2008 BART 4th Qrtr 2010 Percentage

Purchased equipment costs

Rotamix system scope: $2,101,000 Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 $2,225,000 5.9%

Rotamix fan

Rotamix ports with boiler tube bends

Reagent and water storage tanks

Reagent, water pump skids

Rotamix injection lances

Instrumentation for Rotamix

NOx monitoring system $220,000 B&V cost estimate - not included in Nalco-Mobotec proposal $233,000 5.9%

Electrical system upgrades $189,000 B&V cost estimate - for reagent preparation, injection systems $200,000 5.9%

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $2,510,000 $2,658,000

Gross Receipt Tax $155,306 (CC) X 6.2% $164,464

Freight $125,500 (CC) X 5.0% $132,900

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $2,791,000 $2,955,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $567,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $587,000 3.6%

Handling & erection $1,702,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $1,763,000 3.6%

Electrical $567,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $587,000 3.6%

Piping included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Insulation included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Painting included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Demolition $284,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $294,000 3.6%

Relocation $113,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $117,000 3.6%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $3,233,000 $3,348,000

Air preheater modifications $1,071,000 B&V cost estimate $1,134,000 5.9%

Site preparation $0 N/A $0 5.9%

Buildings $0 N/A $0 5.9%

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $7,095,000 $7,437,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $708,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $733,000 3.6%

Owner's cost $355,000 (DC) X 5.0% $372,000

Construction management $1,012,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $1,048,000 3.6%

Start-up and spare parts $213,000 (DC) X 3.0% $223,000

Performance test $100,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate $100,000 No escalation

Contingencies $1,419,000 (DC) X 20.0% $1,487,000

Total indirect costs (IC) $3,807,000 $3,963,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $404,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2) $422,000

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $11,306,000 $11,822,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated level

Maintenance labor and materials $213,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $338,000

Variable annual costs

Reagent $2,053,000 1,313 lb/hr and 420 $/ton Nalco Mobotec prop.

Auxiliary and ID fan power $51,000 112 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Nalco Mobotec prop.

Water $4,000 24 gpm and 0.33 $/kgal Nalco Mobotec prop.

Total variable annual costs $2,108,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $2,446,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $1,151,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $1,151,000 Calculated from escalated costs

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $3,597,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Escalated to Fourth Quarter 2010 Dollars

Technology: Rotamix - SJGS Unit 2 Date: 2/8/2011

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST Estimate Escalation Escalation

Direct Costs in 2008 Dollars Taken from 2008 BART 4th Qrtr 2010 Percentage

Purchased equipment costs

Rotamix system scope: $2,101,000 Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 $2,225,000 5.9%

Rotamix fan

Rotamix ports with boiler tube bends

Reagent and water storage tanks

Reagent, water pump skids

Rotamix injection lances

Instrumentation for Rotamix

NOx monitoring system $220,000 B&V cost estimate - not included in Nalco-Mobotec proposal $233,000 5.9%

Electrical system upgrades $189,000 B&V cost estimate - for reagent preparation, injection systems $200,000 5.9%

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $2,510,000 $2,658,000

Gross Receipt Tax $155,306 (CC) X 6.2% $164,464

Freight $125,500 (CC) X 5.0% $132,900

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $2,791,000 $2,955,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $567,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $587,000 3.6%

Handling & erection $1,702,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $1,763,000 3.6%

Electrical $567,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $587,000 3.6%

Piping included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Insulation included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Painting included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Demolition $284,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $294,000 3.6%

Relocation $113,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $117,000 3.6%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $3,233,000 $3,348,000

Air preheater modifications $1,071,000 B&V cost estimate $1,134,000 5.9%

Site preparation $0 N/A $0 5.9%

Buildings $0 N/A $0 5.9%

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $7,095,000 $7,437,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $708,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $733,000 3.6%

Owner's cost $355,000 (DC) X 5.0% $372,000

Construction management $1,012,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $1,048,000 3.6%

Start-up and spare parts $213,000 (DC) X 3.0% $223,000

Performance test $100,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate $100,000 No escalation

Contingencies $1,419,000 (DC) X 20.0% $1,487,000

Total indirect costs (IC) $3,807,000 $3,963,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $404,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2) $422,000

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $11,306,000 $11,822,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated level

Maintenance labor and materials $213,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $338,000

Variable annual costs

Reagent $2,053,000 1,313 lb/hr and 420 $/ton Nalco Mobotec prop.

Auxiliary and ID fan power $51,000 112 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Nalco Mobotec prop.

Water $4,000 24 gpm and 0.33 $/kgal Nalco Mobotec prop.

Total variable annual costs $2,108,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $2,446,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $1,151,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $1,151,000 Calculated from escalated costs

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $3,597,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Escalated to Fourth Quarter 2010 Dollars

Technology: Rotamix - SJGS Unit 3 Date: 2/8/2011

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST Estimate Escalation Escalation

Direct Costs in 2008 Dollars Taken from 2008 BART 4th Qrtr 2010 Percentage

Purchased equipment costs

Rotamix system scope: $2,337,000 Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 $2,475,000 5.9%

Rotamix fan

Rotamix ports with boiler tube bends

Reagent and water storage tanks

Reagent, water pump skids

Rotamix injection lances

Instrumentation for Rotamix

NOx monitoring system $220,000 B&V cost estimate - not included in Nalco-Mobotec proposal $233,000 5.9%

Electrical system upgrades $242,000 B&V cost estimate - for reagent preparation, injection systems $256,000 5.9%

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $2,799,000 $2,964,000

Gross Receipt Tax $173,188 (CC) X 6.2% $183,398

Freight $139,950 (CC) X 5.0% $148,200

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $3,112,000 $3,296,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $720,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $746,000 3.6%

Handling & erection $2,159,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $2,237,000 3.6%

Electrical $720,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $746,000 3.6%

Piping included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Insulation included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Painting included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Demolition $360,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $373,000 3.6%

Relocation $144,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $149,000 3.6%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $4,103,000 $4,251,000

Air preheater modifications $1,071,000 B&V cost estimate $1,134,000 5.9%

Site preparation $0 N/A $0 5.9%

Buildings $0 N/A $0 5.9%

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $8,286,000 $8,681,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $879,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $911,000 3.6%

Owner's cost $414,000 (DC) X 5.0% $434,000

Construction management $1,255,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $1,300,000 3.6%

Start-up and spare parts $249,000 (DC) X 3.0% $260,000

Performance test $100,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate $100,000 No escalation

Contingencies $1,657,000 (DC) X 20.0% $1,736,000

Total indirect costs (IC) $4,554,000 $4,741,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $476,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2) $497,000

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $13,316,000 $13,919,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated level

Maintenance labor and materials $249,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $374,000

Variable annual costs

Reagent $3,169,000 2,026 lb/hr and 420 $/ton Nalco Mobotec prop.

Auxiliary and ID fan power $84,000 186 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Nalco Mobotec prop.

Water $5,000 37 gpm and 0.33 $/1,000 galNalco Mobotec prop.

Total variable annual costs $3,258,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $3,632,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $1,356,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $1,356,000 Calculated from escalated costs

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $4,988,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Escalated to Fourth Quarter 2010 Dollars

Technology: Rotamix - SJGS Unit 4 Date: 2/8/2011

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST Estimate Escalation Escalation

Direct Costs in 2008 Dollars Taken from 2008 BART 4th Qrtr 2010 Percentage

Purchased equipment costs

Rotamix system scope: $2,337,000 Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 $2,475,000 5.9%

Rotamix fan

Rotamix ports with boiler tube bends

Reagent and water storage tanks

Reagent, water pump skids

Rotamix injection lances

Instrumentation for Rotamix

NOx monitoring system $220,000 B&V cost estimate - not included in Nalco-Mobotec proposal $233,000 5.9%

Electrical system upgrades $242,000 B&V cost estimate - for reagent preparation, injection systems $256,000 5.9%

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $2,799,000 $2,964,000

Gross Receipt Tax $173,188 (CC) X 6.2% $183,398

Freight $139,950 (CC) X 5.0% $148,200

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $3,112,000 $3,296,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $720,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $746,000 3.6%

Handling & erection $2,159,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $2,237,000 3.6%

Electrical $720,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $746,000 3.6%

Piping included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Insulation included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Painting included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Demolition $360,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $373,000 3.6%

Relocation $144,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $149,000 3.6%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $4,103,000 $4,251,000

Air preheater modifications $1,071,000 B&V cost estimate $1,134,000 5.9%

Site preparation $0 N/A $0 5.9%

Buildings $0 N/A $0 5.9%

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $8,286,000 $8,681,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $879,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $911,000 3.6%

Owner's cost $414,000 (DC) X 5.0% $434,000

Construction management $1,255,000 same cost as SNCR system estimate - 5/5/08 $1,300,000 3.6%

Start-up and spare parts $249,000 (DC) X 3.0% $260,000

Performance test $100,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate $100,000 No escalation

Contingencies $1,657,000 (DC) X 20.0% $1,736,000

Total indirect costs (IC) $4,554,000 $4,741,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $476,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2) $497,000

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $13,316,000 $13,919,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated level

Maintenance labor and materials $249,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $374,000

Variable annual costs

Reagent $3,169,000 2,026 lb/hr and 420 $/ton Nalco Mobotec prop.

Auxiliary and ID fan power $84,000 186 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Nalco Mobotec prop.

Water $5,000 37 gpm and 0.33 $/1,000 galNalco Mobotec prop.

Total variable annual costs $3,258,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $3,632,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $1,356,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $1,356,000 Calculated from escalated costs

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $4,988,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Escalated to Fourth Quarter 2010 Dollars

Technology: ROFA & Rotamix - SJGS Unit 1 Date: 2/8/2011

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST Estimate Escalation Escalation

Direct Costs in 2008 Dollars Taken from 2008 BART 4th Qrtr 2010 Percentage

Purchased equipment costs

ROFA-Rotamix system scope: $8,782,000 Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 $9,300,000 5.9%

ROFA fan

ROFA ports with boiler tube bends

ROFA ductwork

Instrumentation for ROFA

Rotamix fan

Rotamix ports with boiler tube bends

Reagent and water storage tanks

Reagent, water pump skids

Rotamix injection lances

Instrumentation for Rotamix

Contingency for combustion system modifications $125,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $132,000 5.9%

NOx monitoring system $220,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $233,000 5.9%

Electrical system upgrades $1,348,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $1,428,000 5.9%

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $10,475,000 $11,093,000

Gross Receipt Tax $648,141 (CC) X 6.2% $686,379

Freight $523,750 (CC) X 5.0% $554,650

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $11,647,000 $12,334,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $819,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $848,000 3.6%

Handling & erection $3,545,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $3,673,000 3.6%

Electrical $1,002,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $1,038,000 3.6%

Piping included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Insulation included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Painting included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Demolition $585,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $606,000 3.6%

Relocation $568,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $588,000 3.6%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $6,519,000 $6,753,000

Air preheater modifications $1,071,000 B&V cost estimate $1,134,000 5.9%

Site preparation $0 N/A $0

Buildings $0 N/A $0

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $19,237,000 $20,221,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $1,947,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $2,017,000 3.6%

Owner's cost $962,000 (DC) X 5.0% $1,011,000

Construction management $1,631,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $1,690,000 3.6%

Start-up and spare parts $577,000 (DC) X 3.0% $607,000

Performance test $100,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate $100,000 No escalation

Contingencies $3,847,000 (DC) X 20.0% $4,044,000

Total indirect costs (IC) $9,064,000 $9,469,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $1,049,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2) $1,100,000

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $29,350,000 $30,790,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated level

Maintenance labor and materials $577,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $702,000

Variable annual costs

Reagent $1,785,000 1,142 lb/hr and 420 $/ton Nalco Mobotec prop.

Auxiliary and ID fan power $1,413,000 3,112 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Nalco Mobotec prop.

Water $3,000 21 gpm and 0.33 $/1,000 galNalco Mobotec prop.

Total variable annual costs $3,201,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $3,903,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $2,999,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $2,999,000 Calculated from escalated costs

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $6,902,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Escalated to Fourth Quarter 2010 Dollars

Technology: ROFA & Rotamix - SJGS Unit 2 Date: 2/8/2011

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST Estimate Escalation Escalation

Direct Costs in 2008 Dollars Taken from 2008 BART 4th Qrtr 2010 Percentage

Purchased equipment costs

ROFA-Rotamix system scope: $8,782,000 Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 $9,300,000 5.9%

ROFA fan

ROFA ports with boiler tube bends

ROFA ductwork

Instrumentation for ROFA

Rotamix fan

Rotamix ports with boiler tube bends

Reagent and water storage tanks

Reagent, water pump skids

Rotamix injection lances

Instrumentation for Rotamix

Contingency for combustion system modifications $125,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $132,000 5.9%

NOx monitoring system $220,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $233,000 5.9%

Electrical system upgrades $1,348,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $1,428,000 5.9%

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $10,475,000 $11,093,000

Gross Receipt Tax $648,141 (CC) X 6.2% $686,379

Freight $523,750 (CC) X 5.0% $554,650

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $11,647,000 $12,334,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $819,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $848,000 3.6%

Handling & erection $3,545,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $3,673,000 3.6%

Electrical $1,002,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $1,038,000 3.6%

Piping included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Insulation included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Painting included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Demolition $585,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $606,000 3.6%

Relocation $568,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $588,000 3.6%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $6,519,000 $6,753,000

Air preheater modifications $1,071,000 B&V cost estimate $1,134,000 5.9%

Site preparation $0 N/A $0

Buildings $0 N/A $0

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $19,237,000 $20,221,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $1,947,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $2,017,000 3.6%

Owner's cost $962,000 (DC) X 5.0% $1,011,000

Construction management $1,631,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $1,690,000 3.6%

Start-up and spare parts $577,000 (DC) X 3.0% $607,000

Performance test $100,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate $100,000 No escalation

Contingencies $3,847,000 (DC) X 20.0% $4,044,000

Total indirect costs (IC) $9,064,000 $9,469,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $1,049,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2) $1,100,000

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $29,350,000 $30,790,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated level

Maintenance labor and materials $577,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $702,000

Variable annual costs

Reagent $1,785,000 1,142 lb/hr and 420 $/ton Nalco Mobotec prop.

Auxiliary and ID fan power $1,413,000 3,112 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Nalco Mobotec prop.

Water $3,000 21 gpm and 0.33 $/1,000 galNalco Mobotec prop.

Total variable annual costs $3,201,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $3,903,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $2,999,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $2,999,000 Calculated from escalated costs

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $6,902,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Escalated to Fourth Quarter 2010 Dollars

Technology: ROFA & Rotamix - SJGS Unit 3 Date: 2/8/2011

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST Estimate Escalation Escalation

Direct Costs in 2008 Dollars Taken from 2008 BART 4th Qrtr 2010 Percentage

Purchased equipment costs

ROFA-Rotamix system scope: $9,988,000 Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 $10,577,000 5.9%

ROFA fan

ROFA ports with boiler tube bends

ROFA ductwork

Instrumentation for ROFA

Rotamix fan

Rotamix ports with boiler tube bends

Reagent and water storage tanks

Reagent, water pump skids

Rotamix injection lances

Instrumentation for Rotamix

Contingency for combustion system modifications $125,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $132,000 5.9%

NOx monitoring system $220,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $233,000 5.9%

Electrical system upgrades $1,456,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $1,542,000 5.9%

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $11,789,000 $12,484,000

Gross Receipt Tax $729,444 (CC) X 6.2% $772,448

Freight $589,450 (CC) X 5.0% $624,200

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $13,108,000 $13,881,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $1,048,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $1,086,000 3.6%

Handling & erection $4,311,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $4,466,000 3.6%

Electrical $1,305,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $1,352,000 3.6%

Piping included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Insulation included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Painting included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Demolition $756,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $783,000 3.6%

Relocation $656,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $680,000 3.6%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $8,076,000 $8,367,000

Air preheater modifications $1,071,000 B&V cost estimate $1,134,000 5.9%

Site preparation $0 N/A $0

Buildings $0 N/A $0

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $22,255,000 $23,382,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $2,300,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $2,383,000 3.6%

Owner's cost $1,113,000 (DC) X 5.0% $1,169,000

Construction management $1,966,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $2,037,000 3.6%

Start-up and spare parts $668,000 (DC) X 3.0% $701,000

Performance test $100,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate $100,000 No escalation

Contingencies $4,451,000 (DC) X 20.0% $4,676,000

Total indirect costs (IC) $10,598,000 $11,066,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $1,217,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2) $1,276,000

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $34,070,000 $35,724,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated level

Maintenance labor and materials $668,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $793,000

Variable annual costs

Reagent $2,722,000 1,741 lb/hr and 420 $/ton Nalco Mobotec prop.

Auxiliary and ID fan power $2,810,000 6,186 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Nalco Mobotec prop.

Water $5,000 32 gpm and 0.33 $/1,000 galNalco Mobotec prop.

Total variable annual costs $5,537,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $6,330,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $3,480,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $3,480,000 Calculated from escalated costs

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $9,810,000
PNM SJGS BART Analysis - Cost Analysis (Draft)

Escalated to Fourth Quarter 2010 Dollars

Technology: ROFA & Rotamix - SJGS Unit 4 Date: 2/8/2011

Cost Item $ Remarks/Cost Basis

CAPITAL COST Estimate Escalation Escalation

Direct Costs in 2008 Dollars Taken from 2008 BART 4th Qrtr 2010 Percentage

Purchased equipment costs

ROFA-Rotamix system scope: $9,988,000 Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 $10,577,000 5.9%

ROFA fan

ROFA ports with boiler tube bends

ROFA ductwork

Instrumentation for ROFA

Rotamix fan

Rotamix ports with boiler tube bends

Reagent and water storage tanks

Reagent, water pump skids

Rotamix injection lances

Instrumentation for Rotamix

Contingency for combustion system modifications $125,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $132,000 5.9%

NOx monitoring system $220,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $233,000 5.9%

Electrical system upgrades $1,456,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $1,542,000 5.9%

Subtotal capital cost (CC) $11,789,000 $12,484,000

Gross Receipt Tax $729,444 (CC) X 6.2% $772,448

Freight $589,450 (CC) X 5.0% $624,200

Total purchased equipment cost (PEC) $13,108,000 $13,881,000

Direct installation costs

Foundation & supports $1,048,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $1,086,000 3.6%

Handling & erection $4,311,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $4,466,000 3.6%

Electrical $1,305,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $1,352,000 3.6%

Piping included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Insulation included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Painting included Nalco-Mobotec proposal, 2/1/2008 included 3.6%

Demolition $756,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $783,000 3.6%

Relocation $656,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $680,000 3.6%

Total direct installation costs (DIC) $8,076,000 $8,367,000

Air preheater modifications $1,071,000 B&V cost estimate $1,134,000 5.9%

Site preparation $0 N/A $0

Buildings $0 N/A $0

Total direct costs (DC) = (PEC) + (DIC) $22,255,000 $23,382,000

Indirect Costs

Engineering $2,300,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $2,383,000 3.6%

Owner's cost $1,113,000 (DC) X 5.0% $1,169,000

Construction management $1,966,000 ROFA + Rotamix cost $2,037,000 3.6%

Start-up and spare parts $668,000 (DC) X 3.0% $701,000

Performance test $100,000 (DC) X Engineering estimate $100,000 No escalation

Contingencies $4,451,000 (DC) X 20.0% $4,676,000

Total indirect costs (IC) $10,598,000 $11,066,000

Interest During Construction (IDC) $1,217,000 [(DC)+(IC)] X 7.41% 1 years (project time length X 1/2) $1,276,000

Total Capital Investment (TCI) = (DC) + (IC) + (IDC) $34,070,000 $35,724,000

ANNUAL COST

Direct Annual Costs

Fixed annual costs

Operating labor $125,000 1 FTE and 124,862 $/year Estimated level

Maintenance labor and materials $668,000 (DC) X 3.0%

Total fixed annual costs $793,000

Variable annual costs

Reagent $2,722,000 1,741 lb/hr and 420 $/ton Nalco Mobotec prop.

Auxiliary and ID fan power $2,810,000 6,186 kW and 0.061 $/kWh Nalco Mobotec prop.

Water $5,000 32 gpm and 0.33 $/1,000 galNalco Mobotec prop.

Total variable annual costs $5,537,000

Total direct annual costs (DAC) $6,330,000

Indirect Annual Costs

Cost for capital recovery $3,480,000 (TCI) X 9.74% CRF at 7.41% interest & 20 year life

Total indirect annual costs (IDAC) $3,480,000 Calculated from escalated costs

Total Annual Cost (TAC) = (DAC) + (IDAC) $9,810,000
02/09/11 

 Attachment 5 

CALPUFF Modeling Stack Parameter Tables 
SJGS Unit 1, Heat Input (HHV) = 3,707 MBtu/hr

Stack Outlet Conditions Flow (acfm) Stack Velocity (ft/s) Temperature (°F) Pressure (in, wg) NOx (lb/MBtu) NOx (lb/hr) SO2 (lb/MBtu) SO2 (lb/hr) PM (lb/MBtu) PM (lb/hr) SO3 (lb/MB

Visibility Modeling Baseline CaseBaseline Upgrades (LNB/OFA, PJFF) 1,323,494 70 121.42 0.01 0.33 1,223.3 0.18 667.3 0.015 55.6 0.011 NOx Control Technologies

1. SNCR 1,323,904 70 121.42 0.01 0.23 852.6 0.18 667.3 0.015 55.6 0.011 Notes1. Emission levels (lb/MBtu) shown are on a 24-hour average basis.2. Emission in (lb/hr) is calculated based on the emission level (lb/MBtu) and design basis heat input.3. Emission levels on a 24-hour average basis are assumed to be similar to the annual average basis.4. Baseline upgrades emissions for visibility modeling purpose are based on information provided by PNM, 4/19/2007.5. Stack velocity is calculated based upon volumetric flowrate and 6.10 m stack diameter.6. All flow conditions are based on the coal as shown in the Design Basis document.7. All SO3 emissions are reported as Sulfuric Acid Mist (H2SO4).

8. SO3 emissions for the baseline cases are determined using the National Park Service calculation formula.

Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM) - San Juan Generating Station (SJGS) Unit 1

Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Engineering Analysis

Stack Outlet Conditions for Visibility Modeling (24-hour Average Emission Rates) Rev. 9

Black & Veatch 
SJGS Unit 2, Heat Input (HHV) = 3,688 MBtu/hr

Stack Outlet Conditions Flow (acfm) Stack Velocity (ft/s) Temperature (°F) Pressure (in, wg) NOx (lb/MBtu) NOx (lb/hr) SO2 (lb/MBtu) SO2 (lb/hr) PM (lb/MBtu) PM (lb/hr) SO3 (lb/MB

Visibility Modeling Baseline CaseBaseline Upgrades (LNB/OFA, PJFF) 1,316,710 70 121.42 0.01 0.33 1,217.0 0.18 663.8 0.015 55.3 0.011 NOx Control Technologies

1. SNCR 1,317,120 70 121.42 0.01 0.23 848.2 0.18 663.8 0.015 55.3 0.011 Notes1. Emission levels (lb/MBtu) shown are on a 24-hour average basis.2. Emission in (lb/hr) is calculated based on the emission level (lb/MBtu) and design basis heat input.3. Emission levels on a 24-hour average basis are assumed to be similar to the annual average basis.4. Baseline upgrades emissions for visibility modeling purpose are based on information provided by PNM, 4/19/2007.5. Stack velocity is calculated based upon volumetric flowrate and 6.10 m stack diameter.6. All flow conditions are based on the coal as shown in the Design Basis document.7. All SO3 emissions are reported as Sulfuric Acid Mist (H2SO4).

8. SO3 emissions for the baseline cases are determined using the National Park Service calculation formula.

Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM) - San Juan Generating Station (SJGS) Unit 2

Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Engineering Analysis

Stack Outlet Conditions for Visibility Modeling (24-hour Average Emission Rates) Rev. 9

Black & Veatch 
SJGS Unit 3, Heat Input (HHV) = 5,758 MBtu/hr

Stack Outlet Conditions Flow (acfm) Stack Velocity (ft/s) Temperature (°F) Pressure (in, wg) NOx (lb/MBtu) NOx (lb/hr) SO2 (lb/MBtu) SO2 (lb/hr) PM (lb/MBtu) PM (lb/hr) SO3 (lb/MB

Visibility Modeling Baseline CaseBaseline Upgrades (LNB/OFA, PJFF) 2,055,753 56 121.42 0.01 0.33 1,900.1 0.18 1,036.4 0.015 86.4 0.011 NOx Control Technologies

1. SNCR 2,056,389 56 121.42 0.01 0.23 1,324.3 0.18 1,036.4 0.015 86.4 0.011 Notes1. Emission levels (lb/MBtu) shown are on a 24-hour average basis.2. Emission in (lb/hr) is calculated based on the emission level (lb/MBtu) and design basis heat input.3. Emission levels on a 24-hour average basis are assumed to be similar to the annual average basis.4. Baseline upgrades emissions for visibility modeling purpose are based on information provided by PNM, 4/19/2007.5. Stack velocity is calculated based upon volumetric flowrate and 6.10 m stack diameter.6. All flow conditions are based on the coal as shown in the Design Basis document.7. All SO3 emissions are reported as Sulfuric Acid Mist (H2SO4).

8. SO3 emissions for the baseline cases are determined using the National Park Service calculation formula.

Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM) - San Juan Generating Station (SJGS) Unit 3

Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Engineering Analysis

Stack Outlet Conditions for Visibility Modeling (24-hour Average Emission Rates) Rev. 9

Black & Veatch 
SJGS Unit 4, Heat Input (HHV) = 5,649 MBtu/hr

Stack Outlet Conditions Flow (acfm) Stack Velocity (ft/s) Temperature (°F) Pressure (in, wg) NOx (lb/MBtu) NOx (lb/hr) SO2 (lb/MBtu) SO2 (lb/hr) PM (lb/MBtu) PM (lb/hr) SO3 (lb/MB

Visibility Modeling Baseline CaseBaseline Upgrades (LNB/OFA, PJFF) 2,016,837 55 121.42 0.01 0.33 1,864.2 0.18 1,016.8 0.015 84.7 0.011 NOx Control Technologies

1. SNCR 2,017,473 55 121.42 0.01 0.23 1,299.3 0.18 1,016.8 0.015 84.7 0.011 Notes1. Emission levels (lb/MBtu) shown are on a 24-hour average basis.2. Emission in (lb/hr) is calculated based on the emission level (lb/MBtu) and design basis heat input.3. Emission levels on a 24-hour average basis are assumed to be similar to the annual average basis.4. Baseline upgrades emissions for visibility modeling purpose are based on information provided by PNM, 4/19/2007.5. Stack velocity is calculated based upon volumetric flowrate and 6.10 m stack diameter.6. All flow conditions are based on the coal as shown in the Design Basis document.7. All SO3 emissions are reported as Sulfuric Acid Mist (H2SO4).

8. SO3 emissions for the baseline cases are determined using the National Park Service calculation formula.

Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM) - San Juan Generating Station (SJGS) Unit 4

Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Engineering Analysis

Stack Outlet Conditions for Visibility Modeling (24-hour Average Emission Rates) Rev. 9

Black & Veatch 
02/09/11 

Attachment 6 

Summary of 2001 to 2003 CALPUFF Results and 

Visibility and Associated $/dv Summary 
Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum

Arches 1.69 1.65 1.49 1.61 1.69

Bandelier 1.04 1.56 1.20 1.27 1.56

Black Canyon 0.95 1.15 1.07 1.05 1.15

Canyonlands 2.26 1.73 1.68 1.89 2.26

Capitol Reef 1.81 0.82 1.05 1.23 1.81

Grand Canyon 0.97 0.76 0.57 0.77 0.97

Great Sand Dunes 0.63 0.71 0.64 0.66 0.71

La Garita 0.86 0.94 0.90 0.90 0.94

Maroon Bells 0.54 0.56 0.51 0.54 0.56

Mesa Verde 3.38 3.53 3.80 3.57 3.80

Pecos 1.05 1.09 1.00 1.05 1.09

Petrified Forest 0.82 0.60 0.53 0.65 0.82

San Pedro 1.40 2.01 1.56 1.66 2.01

West Elk 0.80 0.91 0.83 0.85 0.91

Weminuche 1.15 1.48 1.34 1.33 1.48

Wheeler Peak 0.75 0.86 0.89 0.83 0.89

Overall 1.24 3.80

Table 1

Baseline Visibility Modeling Results

98th Percentile for Each Year (dv)

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning

Baseline
Class I Area 2001 2002 2003 Average Maximum

Arches 1.61 1.49 1.27 1.45 1.61

Bandelier 0.91 1.35 1.14 1.13 1.35

Black Canyon 0.84 0.98 0.96 0.92 0.98

Canyonlands 2.13 1.60 1.60 1.78 2.13

Capitol Reef 1.62 0.71 0.98 1.10 1.62

Grand Canyon 0.84 0.64 0.57 0.68 0.84

Great Sand Dunes 0.57 0.61 0.51 0.56 0.61

La Garita 0.74 0.79 0.77 0.77 0.79

Maroon Bells 0.50 0.47 0.43 0.47 0.50

Mesa Verde 3.35 3.21 3.58 3.38 3.58

Pecos 0.88 0.92 0.91 0.90 0.92

Petrified Forest 0.77 0.54 0.50 0.60 0.77

San Pedro 1.30 1.77 1.47 1.51 1.77

West Elk 0.73 0.76 0.69 0.73 0.76

Weminuche 1.03 1.32 1.14 1.16 1.32

Wheeler Peak 0.68 0.75 0.74 0.72 0.75

Overall 1.12 3.58

1 SNCR @ 0.23 lb/MBtu NOx for all Units.

Table 2

SNCR Reduction Visibility Modeling Results

98th Percentile Impact for Each Year (dv)

1

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning

SCNR
Visibility Improvements (dv) Improvement ($/dv)

Calculated from Maximum 

Visibility Results 

(for each Class I Area)

(see Note 2)

Class 1 Area Baseline SNCR Control Run3 Baseline to SNCR Baseline to SNCR

Arches 1.69 1.61 0.09 $198,611,764.71

Bandelier 1.56 1.35 0.21 $81,163,461.54

Black Canyon 1.15 0.98 0.17 $98,725,146.20

Canyonlands 2.26 2.13 0.13 $130,868,217.05

Capitol Reef 1.81 1.62 0.19 $88,387,434.55

Grand Canyon 0.97 0.84 0.13 $127,893,939.39

Great Sand Dunes 0.71 0.61 0.10 $162,326,923.08

La Garita 0.94 0.79 0.16 $108,916,129.03

Maroon Bells 0.56 0.50 0.06 $267,968,253.97

Mesa Verde 3.80 3.58 0.22 $78,520,930.23

Pecos 1.09 0.92 0.18 $95,920,454.55

Petrified Forest 0.82 0.77 0.05 $351,708,333.33

San Pedro 2.01 1.77 0.25 $68,348,178.14

West Elk 0.91 0.76 0.16 $106,848,101.27

Weminuche 1.48 1.32 0.16 $104,209,876.54

Wheeler Peak 0.89 0.75 0.14 $117,236,111.11

Notes:

1. Maximum of 2001, 2002 and 2003 visibility data.

2. Total Annualized Costs used in calculating Improvement are as follows (in $1,000):

Baseline to SNCR. $16,882

3. SNCR @ 0.23 lb/MMBtu of NOx for all Units.

(98th Percentile, see Note 1)

Table 3

SJGS Visibility Improvement Cost Effectiveness for Each Class 1 Area (Based on Maximum Visibility Modeling Results)

Variable Ammonia Background and Nitrate Repartitioning

Maximum Visibility Modeling Results (dv)

Maximum Cost Effectiveness
02/09/11 

Attachment 7 

98th Percentile CALPUFF Results 
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning

2001

Consent Decree 

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 47 1.69 33.57 62.13 1.88 0.48 0.48 1.46 100

BAND 49 1.04 30.40 66.83 1.26 0.32 0.23 0.97 100

BLCA 26 0.95 37.13 57.66 2.28 0.58 0.58 1.76 100

CANY 67 2.26 55.66 38.57 2.53 0.65 0.62 1.98 100

CARE 28 1.81 52.95 42.68 1.91 0.49 0.48 1.49 100

GRCA 12 0.97 38.14 59.75 0.93 0.24 0.19 0.75 100

GRSA 14 0.63 38.82 54.18 3.18 0.81 0.53 2.47 100

LAGA 20 0.86 38.38 59.80 0.81 0.21 0.15 0.65 100

MABE 10 0.54 69.46 25.41 2.29 0.59 0.43 1.83 100

MEVE 157 3.38 75.39 9.84 6.26 1.60 2.09 4.82 100

PECO 35 1.05 80.51 15.41 1.83 0.47 0.36 1.43 100

PEFO 14 0.82 27.95 69.41 1.18 0.30 0.25 0.92 100

SAPE 93 1.40 39.89 53.93 2.71 0.69 0.68 2.09 100

WEEL 19 0.80 37.76 60.62 0.70 0.18 0.19 0.55 100

WEMI 53 1.15 28.74 65.59 2.44 0.62 0.72 1.88 100

WHPE 27 0.75 30.82 66.18 1.36 0.35 0.23 1.06 100

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning

2002

Consent Decree

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 32 1.65 49.70 47.38 1.28 0.33 0.30 1.01 100

BAND 61 1.56 37.39 59.91 1.19 0.30 0.27 0.93 100

BLCA 30 1.15 31.11 65.99 1.28 0.33 0.28 1.02 100

CANY 57 1.73 52.51 43.96 1.55 0.40 0.35 1.23 100

CARE 18 0.82 91.30 1.66 3.11 0.79 0.69 2.46 100

GRCA 10 0.76 44.30 54.26 0.64 0.16 0.12 0.52 100

GRSA 17 0.71 28.48 69.87 0.74 0.19 0.13 0.60 100

LAGA 40 0.94 26.32 71.29 1.07 0.27 0.22 0.84 100

MABE 11 0.56 84.39 12.71 1.31 0.33 0.23 1.03 100

MEVE 162 3.53 85.08 5.44 4.14 1.06 1.04 3.24 100

PECO 41 1.09 41.87 56.64 0.66 0.17 0.13 0.53 100

PEFO 9 0.60 28.65 69.64 0.76 0.19 0.13 0.62 100

SAPE 109 2.01 46.15 47.36 2.82 0.72 0.76 2.19 100

WEEL 24 0.91 30.66 67.44 0.86 0.22 0.14 0.68 100

WEMI 83 1.48 57.20 35.77 3.02 0.77 0.91 2.32 100

WHPE 20 0.86 47.51 47.27 2.35 0.60 0.43 1.84 100

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning

2003

Consent Decree 

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 27 1.49 30.95 67.01 0.89 0.23 0.21 0.71 100

BAND 57 1.20 77.97 17.21 2.11 0.54 0.52 1.65 100

BLCA 21 1.07 27.98 70.17 0.82 0.21 0.17 0.65 100

CANY 48 1.68 70.45 24.81 2.07 0.53 0.49 1.65 100

CARE 23 1.05 52.60 45.24 0.94 0.24 0.20 0.77 100

GRCA 9 0.57 93.89 1.17 2.19 0.56 0.46 1.74 100

GRSA 15 0.64 27.42 70.94 0.76 0.19 0.09 0.60 100

LAGA 28 0.90 23.76 71.98 1.99 0.51 0.18 1.58 100

MABE 8 0.51 27.63 69.59 1.22 0.31 0.28 0.97 100

MEVE 159 3.80 41.19 53.18 2.41 0.62 0.72 1.88 100

PECO 50 1.00 51.25 46.75 0.89 0.23 0.18 0.70 100

PEFO 9 0.53 32.43 65.01 1.15 0.29 0.18 0.93 100

SAPE 97 1.56 37.04 56.49 2.78 0.71 0.83 2.15 100

WEEL 22 0.83 28.10 67.91 1.74 0.44 0.44 1.36 100

WEMI 63 1.34 36.23 61.45 1.00 0.26 0.29 0.77 100

WHPE 27 0.89 91.09 5.38 1.60 0.41 0.26 1.25 100
PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2001

SNCR - Nox @ 0.23 lb/MBtu

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 44 1.61 72.81 19.83 3.28 0.84 0.54 2.71 100

BAND 42 0.91 42.35 53.31 1.92 0.49 0.46 1.49 100

BLCA 20 0.84 53.56 41.60 2.14 0.55 0.46 1.70 100

CANY 63 2.13 73.54 22.85 1.60 0.41 0.34 1.27 100

CARE 27 1.62 59.78 35.30 2.16 0.55 0.54 1.68 100

GRCA 11 0.84 44.44 53.10 1.09 0.28 0.22 0.87 100

GRSA 10 0.57 82.01 11.72 2.88 0.74 0.39 2.25 100

LAGA 14 0.74 33.33 61.80 2.16 0.55 0.48 1.68 100

MABE 7 0.50 45.94 50.47 1.61 0.41 0.29 1.27 100

MEVE 153 3.35 76.19 8.88 6.33 1.62 2.11 4.87 100

PECO 30 0.88 49.12 47.72 1.41 0.36 0.28 1.11 100

PEFO 13 0.77 88.60 7.79 1.58 0.40 0.38 1.24 100

SAPE 85 1.30 76.93 16.40 2.88 0.74 0.83 2.22 100

WEEL 16 0.73 43.95 54.37 0.76 0.19 0.13 0.60 100

WEMI 42 1.03 90.48 1.83 3.42 0.87 0.73 2.67 100

WHPE 20 0.68 81.21 12.88 2.65 0.68 0.51 2.07 100

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2002

SNCR - Nox @ 0.23 lb/MBtu

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 30 1.49 41.03 53.51 2.38 0.61 0.62 1.85 100

BAND 50 1.35 41.58 51.66 2.97 0.76 0.73 2.29 100

BLCA 26 0.98 39.93 57.72 1.06 0.27 0.17 0.84 100

CANY 50 1.60 44.84 50.30 2.09 0.53 0.62 1.62 100

CARE 13 0.71 40.05 57.91 0.90 0.23 0.19 0.73 100

GRCA 10 0.64 52.99 45.29 0.76 0.19 0.14 0.63 100

GRSA 10 0.61 35.16 60.88 1.78 0.45 0.33 1.39 100

LAGA 22 0.79 33.99 59.77 2.77 0.71 0.62 2.14 100

MABE 6 0.47 36.12 61.24 1.17 0.30 0.23 0.93 100

MEVE 157 3.21 78.44 9.96 4.96 1.27 1.54 3.84 100

PECO 34 0.92 50.34 47.87 0.80 0.20 0.16 0.63 100

PEFO 8 0.54 36.19 60.97 1.27 0.32 0.21 1.04 100

SAPE 95 1.77 41.15 53.49 2.34 0.60 0.59 1.83 100

WEEL 20 0.76 42.88 51.47 2.54 0.65 0.48 1.99 100

WEMI 60 1.32 40.77 57.10 0.93 0.24 0.23 0.73 100

WHPE 17 0.75 38.81 59.44 0.78 0.20 0.15 0.62 100

PNM SJGS BART Modeling - All Units

Nitrate Repartitioning - Monthly Varying NH3 Background

2003

SNCR - Nox @ 0.23 lb/MBtu

Class I Area No. of Days > 0.5 dv 98th Percentile %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF %_Total

ARCH 24 1.27 75.89 21.42 1.18 0.30 0.26 0.94 100

BAND 49 1.14 82.29 12.61 2.23 0.57 0.55 1.74 100

BLCA 18 0.96 45.73 49.82 1.94 0.50 0.50 1.52 100

CANY 43 1.60 74.16 20.85 2.18 0.56 0.51 1.74 100

CARE 21 0.98 49.83 47.77 1.05 0.27 0.25 0.84 100

GRCA 8 0.57 94.24 0.81 2.19 0.56 0.46 1.74 100

GRSA 10 0.51 27.65 70.10 0.98 0.25 0.24 0.77 100

LAGA 14 0.77 54.10 42.54 1.49 0.38 0.34 1.16 100

MABE 6 0.43 33.03 63.63 1.46 0.37 0.34 1.16 100

MEVE 156 3.58 82.06 0.90 7.26 1.85 2.36 5.58 100

PECO 40 0.91 47.63 48.61 1.70 0.43 0.30 1.33 100

PEFO 6 0.50 90.98 5.08 1.76 0.45 0.31 1.41 100

SAPE 90 1.47 84.37 8.84 2.95 0.75 0.79 2.30 100

WEEL 14 0.69 33.89 61.30 2.10 0.54 0.53 1.64 100

WEMI 54 1.14 37.46 59.26 1.46 0.37 0.30 1.15 100

WHPE 22 0.74 37.08 59.00 1.77 0.45 0.29 1.40 100