BART Exemption Modeling Report: 

Georgia Power Company 

Plant Mitchell 

Prepared by: 

Southern Company Services and ENSR Corporation 

for Georgia Power Company 

September 2006
i September 2006 091506 Mitchell BART Modeling Report.doc

Contents 

1.0 Introduction............................................................................................................................................... 1-1

1.1 Objectives ........................................................................................................................................ 1-1

1.2 Location of source vs. relevant Class I Areas ................................................................................ 1-1

2.0 Source description and emissions data ............................................................................................... 2-1

2.1 Unit-specific source data................................................................................................................. 2-1

3.0 Modeling results....................................................................................................................................... 3-1

Appendix A Delta-Deciview Values for The Top 20 Days – For Each Year/Each Class I Area 

 and for the Top 25 Days – Over Three Years.....................................................................A-1 
ii September 2006 091506 Mitchell BART Modeling Report.doc

List of Tables 

Table 2-1 Plant Mitchell modeling emission parameters......................................................................... 2-3

Table 3-1 Summary of Results – Plant Mitchell Refined BART Exemption Modeling........................... 3-1 

List of Figures 

Figure 1-1 Location of PSD Class I Areas in relation to Plant Mitchell..................................................... 1-2
1-1 September 2006 091506 Mitchell BART Modeling Report.doc

1.0 Introduction 

1.1 Objectives 

The Regional Haze Rule requires Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) for any BART-eligible source that 

‘‘emits any air pollutant which may reasonably be anticipated to cause or contribute to any impairment of 

visibility” in any mandatory Class I federal area. Pursuant to federal regulations, states have the option of 

exempting a BART-eligible source from the BART requirements based on dispersion modeling demonstrating

that the source cannot reasonably be anticipated to cause or contribute to visibility impairment in a Class I 

area. In addition, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has promulgated a rule allowing states subject 

to the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) to determine that CAIR satisfies the BART requirements for SO2 and 

NOx for electric generating units (EGUs). Feedback from the Georgia Environmental Protection Division 

indicates that CAIR satisfies BART for SO2 and NOx for EGUs. Therefore, this modeling report focuses on 

performing the BART modeling analysis for particulate matter (PM) only. 

Unit 3 at Plant Mitchell, located near Albany, which is owned and operated by Georgia Power Company, has 

been identified as a BART-eligible source. The modeling procedures outlined in the source-specific BART 

modeling protocol for Plant Mitchell were used to determine whether the source is subject to BART 

requirements (exemption modeling). The modeling procedures are consistent with those outlined in the 

updated final VISTAS common BART modeling protocol (dated December 22, 2005, revision 3 – July 18, 

2006), available at http://www.vistas-sesarm.org/BART/BARTModelingProtocol_rev3_18Jul2006.pdf. This 

source-specific BART modeling protocol references relevant portions of the common VISTAS modeling 

protocol. 

1.2 Location of source vs. relevant Class I Areas 

The Georgia Environmental Protection Division, which is in charge of the state’s BART program, has 

determined that Unit 3 at Plant Mitchell is BART-eligible for PM. Figure 1-1 shows a plot of Plant Mitchell 

relative to nearby Class I Areas. There are three Class I areas within 300 km of the plant: Okefenokee (163.4 

km), Saint Marks (141.7 km), and Wolf Island (265.4 km). The BART exemption modeling was conducted for 

these Class I areas in accordance with the referenced VISTAS common BART modeling protocol and the 

procedures described in the source-specific BART modeling protocol. 
1-2 September 2006 091506 Mitchell BART Modeling Report.doc

Figure 1-1 Location of Class I Areas in Relation to Plant Mitchell 
2-1 September 2006 091506 Mitchell BART Modeling Report.doc

2.0 Source description and emissions data 

2.1 Unit-specific source data 

The emissions data used to assess the visibility impacts at the Class I areas within 300 km of Plant Mitchell 

are discussed in this section. The Georgia Environmental Protection Division has indicated that CAIR will 

satisfy BART for EGUs for SO2 and NOx. Therefore, this BART exemption modeling analysis focuses only on 

PM10. Since various components of PM10 emissions have different visibility extinction efficiencies, the PM10

emissions are divided, or “speciated,” into several components (VISTAS common protocol Sections 4.3.3 and 

4.4.2). The VISTAS protocol (Section 5) allows for the use of source-specific emissions and speciation factors 

and/or default values from AP-42. The PM10 emissions and speciation approach that were used for the 

modeling is indicated below. Where default speciation values are used, the data represents a unit where 

current (baseline) emission controls include electrostatic precipitators (ESPs), but no post-combustion NOx or 

SO2 control equipment exists. 

• Total PM10 is comprised of filterable and condensable emissions. 

• Baseline filterable PM10 emissions are based on the highest stack test for the most recent 3-year 

period (2003-2005). This stack test is combined with the highest 24 hour heat input value for this 

period from CEMS data to calculate the “maximum 24 hour average emission rate” as required by the 

VISTAS protocol. 

• Filterable PM10 has been subdivided by size category consistent with the default approach from AP-42 

Table 1-1.6, and as noted on pages 43 and 44 of the VISTAS common BART modeling protocol. The 

AP-42 Table 1-1.6 specifies for the emission controls indicated above that 55.6% of filterable PM10

emissions is coarse (greater than 2.5 microns in size) and 44.4% is fine. Of the fine portion, 3.7% is 

elemental carbon and the remainder is inorganic fine particulates (soil). 

• Condensable PM10 consists of inorganic and organic compounds. The inorganic portion is by default 

assumed to be H2SO4, although other non-sulfate inorganic condensables could be present. The 

organic portion is modeled as organic aerosols. 

• Baseline H2SO4 emissions are calculated consistent with the method used by Georgia Power to derive 

these emissions for TRI purposes. This approach assumes that the H2SO4 emissions released from 

the stack are proportional to SO2 emissions from combustion and are dependent on the fuel type and 

the removal of H2SO4 by downstream equipment (i.e., ESP and air heater). For eastern bituminous 

coal the baseline H2SO4 release rate is in the range of 0.3 to 0.8% of the SO2 emissions. Appendix A 

of the site-specific modeling protocol provides the basis for the site-specific values used. 

• Baseline emissions of condensable organics (the remaining portion of condensable PM10) are derived 

based on the supporting field observational information in Appendix B of the site-specific modeling 

protocol and is estimated as 0.32% of SO2 emitted. 

• Coarse filterable particles (between 2.5 and 10 microns in size) will be modeled with a geometric mass

mean diameter of 5 microns, while fine filterable and all condensable particles will be modeled with a

geometric mass mean diameter of 0.48 microns, consistent with the CALPUFF default value for fine 

particles. The geometric standard deviation for both fine and coarse particles will be set to 2 microns, 

consistent with the CALPUFF default value. The 0.48 micron diameter value for fine particles comes 

from the default values in sample input files presented on the TRC web site. There is no default 

value presented for the coarse particles on the TRC web site. However, since 5 is the geometric 

mass mean diameter of 2.5 and 10 (the bounds of coarse particle sizes), it is a reasonable estimate 

for the geometric mass mean diameter for that class of particles. 

In practice, CALPUFF allows for the user to input certain components of PM10 as separate species and 

separate sizes, which will result in more accurate wet and dry deposition velocity results and also more 
2-2 September 2006 091506 Mitchell BART Modeling Report.doc

accurate effects on light scattering. As noted above, the particle size distribution information is provided in 

AP-42 Table 1-1.6, and will be used for the BART exemption modeling. 

Table 2-1 provides a summary of the modeling emission parameters used in the BART CALPUFF modeling, 

consistent with the source emissions data presented in Appendices A and B of the site-specific modeling 

protocol for the baseline. All of the emissions in Table 2-1 were derived from CEMS data for the 2003 to 2005 

period and represent the maximum 24-hour average lb/hr rates (excluding days where startup, shutdown, or 

malfunctions occurred). For NOx and SO2 the values are directly from CEMS. Filterable PM10 emissions were 

calculated using the highest stack test over the 2003 to 2005 period and multiplying these values times the 

maximum 24-hour average heat input derived from CEMS. These values were then adjusted using AP-42 

factors from Table 1.1-6 that indicate that PM10 is 67% of total PM for a pulverized coal unit with an ESP. PM10

speciation was then performed as indicated above such that total Filterable PM10 is made up of Coarse Soil 

plus total Fine PM and total Fine PM is made up of Fine Soil plus Elemental Carbon (EC). 
2-3 

091506 Mitchell BART Modeling Report.doc

Table 2-1 Plant Mitchell modeling emission parameters 

Location UTM 

(Zone 17 NAD-83) Emissions1 Parti

Case Source / Unit UTM 

East 

UTM 

North 

Actual 

Stack Ht 

Base 

Elev. 

Flue 

Diameter 

Gas 

Exit 

Vel. 

Stack 

Gas 

Exit 

Temp. SO2 NOX PM10 Filt. PM10 Coarse Soil Fine PM F

S

 m m m m m m/s deg K lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lb

Baseline Data - Current Configuration (Unit Basis) 

Baseline Unit 3 772,550 3,482,419 152.4 53.0 6.4 9.2 421.9 4408.41 1032.50 63.77 36.69 20.40 16.29 1

Baseline Data - Current Configuration (Stack Basis)

Modeled 

Stk Ht3

Baseline m m m m m m/s deg K lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lbs/hr lb

Stack 1 Unit 3 772,550 3,482,419 105.2 53.0 6.4 9.2 421.9 4408.41 1032.50 63.77 36.69 20.40 16.29 1

Stack Basis Emissions Converted to g/sec g/sec g/sec g/sec g/sec g/sec g/sec g/

Stack 1 Unit 3 772,550 3,482,419 105.2 53.0 6.4 9.2 421.9 555.46 130.09 8.03 4.62 2.57 2.05 1

1 SO2 and NOx emissions are not BART-applicable for EGU sources in CAIR states, if the state agency agrees with EPA’s interpretation 

emissions for SO2 and NOx are provided for information purposes, and for reference in the computation of certain particle species such 

2 Elemental carbon (EC) and Fine PM are a part of Filterable PM10 and H2SO4 and Organics are a part of Condensable PM10. Note that 

SO4. The molecular weights of H2SO4 and SO4 are 98 and 96 respectively, therefore the conversion factor from H2SO4 to SO4 is 96/98. 

3 Stack credit is equal to GEP. GEP of 345 ft (105.2 m) is less than actual height therefore GEP height is used for modeling. 
3-1 September 2006 091506 Mitchell BART Modeling Report.doc

3.0 Modeling results 

The exemption modeling results are provided in Table 3-1, and Appendix A lists delta-deciview results for the 

top 20 days for each year modeled and the top 25 days for the overall three years at each Class I area. The 

table indicates that both the 8th highest day’s impacts for each year and the 22nd highest day’s impacts over all 

three years are below 0.5 delta-dv. These results demonstrate that Plant Mitchell’s PM10 emissions do not 

cause or contribute to visibility impairment. Therefore, the source is not subject to BART for PM10, and no 

further BART analysis is required. 

Electronic data related to this application are provided on the attached disk. They include all input (INP) and 

list (LST) files.
3-1 September 2006 091506 Mitchell BART Modeling Report.doc

Table 3-1 Summary of Results – Plant Mitchell Refined BART Exemption Modeling 

2001 2002 2003 

Class I area 

Distance 

from source 

to Class I 

area 

boundary 

# of days and 

receptors 

beyond 98th

percentile with 

impact > 0.5 

delta-dv 

8

th

Highest 

delta-dv 

# of days and 

receptors 

beyond 98th

percentile with 

impact > 0.5 

delta-dv 

8

th

Highest 

delta-dv 

# of days and 

receptors 

beyond 98th

percentile with 

impact > 0.5 

delta-dv 

8

th

Highest 

delta-dv 

Highest of 

8

th Highest 

delta-dv 

for the 3-

years 

22nd

Highest 

delta-dv 

over 3-

year 

period 

 km Days Rec delta-dv Days Rec delta-dv Days Rec delta-dv delta-dv delta-dv 

Okefenokee 163.4 0 0 0.03 0 0 0.04 0 0 0.04 0.04 0.03 

Wolf Island 265.4 0 0 0.02 0 0 0.01 0 0 0.01 0.02 0.01 

Saint Marks 141.7 0 0 0.04 0 0 0.05 0 0 0.04 0.05 0.04 
Appendix A 

Delta-Deciview Values for the Top 20 Days – for Each Year/Each 

Class I Area and for the Top 25 Days – Over Three Years 
Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Okefenokee (Top 20 Days for Each Year) 

 % of Modeled Extinction by Species 

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Ranking

2001 221 387 7.645 7.608 0.037 4.1 71.35 0.00 18.77 2.11 2.54 5.22 1 

2001 192 494 7.645 7.608 0.037 3.7 69.58 0.00 20.29 2.28 2.21 5.64 2 

2001 65 139 7.644 7.608 0.036 3.1 66.85 0.00 23.26 2.61 0.80 6.47 3 

2001 151 280 7.642 7.608 0.034 3.6 68.57 0.00 20.55 2.31 2.86 5.71 4 

2001 313 499 7.639 7.608 0.031 3.5 68.54 0.00 21.13 2.37 2.07 5.88 5 

2001 234 51 7.638 7.608 0.030 4.1 71.38 0.00 18.78 2.11 2.50 5.22 6 

2001 5 17 7.636 7.608 0.028 3.5 68.10 0.00 20.99 2.36 2.71 5.84 7 

2001 336 275 7.635 7.608 0.027 3.6 69.03 0.00 20.69 2.32 2.20 5.75 8 

2001 137 494 7.635 7.608 0.027 3.6 68.95 0.00 20.66 2.32 2.31 5.75 9 

2001 361 500 7.634 7.608 0.026 3.6 69.32 0.00 20.77 2.33 1.79 5.78 10 

2001 190 299 7.634 7.608 0.026 3.7 69.85 0.00 20.37 2.29 1.83 5.66 11 

2001 187 499 7.634 7.608 0.026 3.7 69.54 0.00 20.27 2.28 2.27 5.64 12 

2001 61 17 7.634 7.608 0.026 3.1 65.33 0.00 22.73 2.55 3.05 6.32 13 

2001 8 189 7.634 7.608 0.026 3.5 68.20 0.00 21.02 2.36 2.56 5.85 14 

2001 202 406 7.633 7.608 0.025 3.7 68.89 0.00 20.09 2.26 3.17 5.59 15 

2001 133 254 7.633 7.608 0.025 3.6 69.04 0.00 20.69 2.32 2.18 5.75 16 

2001 7 371 7.633 7.608 0.025 3.5 68.84 0.00 21.22 2.38 1.66 5.90 17 

2001 337 1 7.632 7.608 0.024 3.6 69.17 0.00 20.73 2.33 2.00 5.76 18 

2001 92 104 7.632 7.608 0.024 3.0 64.52 0.00 23.20 2.61 3.22 6.45 19 

2001 189 299 7.632 7.608 0.023 3.7 69.32 0.00 20.21 2.27 2.56 5.62 20 

 

2002 351 17 7.699 7.608 0.091 3.6 69.22 0.00 20.74 2.33 1.94 5.77 1 

2002 364 393 7.667 7.608 0.059 3.6 68.77 0.00 20.61 2.32 2.57 5.73 2 

2002 346 254 7.656 7.608 0.048 3.6 68.75 0.00 20.60 2.31 2.60 5.73 3 

2002 19 464 7.652 7.608 0.044 3.5 68.54 0.00 21.13 2.37 2.07 5.88 4 

2002 327 17 7.645 7.608 0.037 3.5 68.16 0.00 21.01 2.36 2.62 5.84 5 

2002 338 16 7.643 7.608 0.035 3.6 69.04 0.00 20.69 2.32 2.18 5.75 6 

2002 214 357 7.643 7.608 0.035 4.1 71.85 0.00 18.90 2.12 1.86 5.26 7 

2002 202 500 7.643 7.608 0.035 3.7 69.56 0.00 20.28 2.28 2.23 5.64 8 

2002 48 139 7.642 7.608 0.034 3.2 66.34 0.00 22.36 2.51 2.56 6.22 9 

2002 182 393 7.641 7.608 0.033 3.7 69.38 0.00 20.23 2.27 2.48 5.63 10 

2002 322 348 7.638 7.608 0.030 3.5 69.12 0.00 21.30 2.39 1.25 5.92 11 

2002 8 299 7.638 7.608 0.030 3.5 68.34 0.00 21.06 2.37 2.36 5.86 12 

2002 219 393 7.636 7.608 0.028 4.1 71.23 0.00 18.74 2.11 2.70 5.21 13 

2002 355 478 7.634 7.608 0.026 3.6 69.60 0.00 20.86 2.34 1.40 5.80 14 

2002 349 254 7.634 7.608 0.026 3.6 69.65 0.00 20.87 2.35 1.33 5.80 15 

2002 237 499 7.635 7.608 0.026 4.1 71.44 0.00 18.80 2.11 2.43 5.23 16 

2002 255 499 7.633 7.608 0.025 4.0 71.20 0.00 19.20 2.16 2.10 5.34 17 

2002 347 254 7.632 7.608 0.024 3.6 68.32 0.00 20.47 2.30 3.21 5.69 18 

2002 74 86 7.633 7.608 0.024 3.1 64.98 0.00 22.61 2.54 3.58 6.29 19 

2002 304 299 7.630 7.608 0.022 3.8 70.82 0.00 20.11 2.26 1.21 5.59 20 

 

2003 50 51 7.658 7.608 0.050 3.2 67.07 0.00 22.61 2.54 1.49 6.29 1 

2003 9 433 7.657 7.608 0.049 3.5 68.27 0.00 21.04 2.36 2.47 5.85 2 

2003 353 68 7.655 7.608 0.047 3.6 68.54 0.00 20.54 2.31 2.90 5.71 3 

2003 191 500 7.654 7.608 0.046 3.7 69.14 0.00 20.16 2.26 2.83 5.61 4 

2003 27 254 7.653 7.608 0.045 3.5 69.20 0.00 21.33 2.40 1.14 5.93 5 

2003 210 434 7.652 7.608 0.044 3.7 69.14 0.00 20.16 2.27 2.82 5.61 6 

2003 352 17 7.646 7.608 0.038 3.6 69.52 0.00 20.83 2.34 1.51 5.79 7 

2003 49 254 7.646 7.608 0.038 3.2 66.74 0.00 22.50 2.53 1.98 6.26 8 

2003 4 254 7.640 7.608 0.032 3.5 69.04 0.00 21.28 2.39 1.38 5.92 9 

2003 83 393 7.638 7.608 0.030 3.1 66.35 0.00 23.09 2.59 1.54 6.42 10 

2003 173 433 7.636 7.608 0.028 3.7 69.57 0.00 20.28 2.28 2.23 5.64 11 

2003 123 448 7.636 7.608 0.028 3.6 69.03 0.00 20.68 2.32 2.20 5.75 12 

2003 103 324 7.636 7.608 0.028 3.0 64.71 0.00 23.27 2.61 2.94 6.47 13 

2003 44 347 7.636 7.608 0.028 3.2 67.00 0.00 22.59 2.54 1.59 6.28 14 

2003 102 371 7.633 7.608 0.025 3.0 64.92 0.00 23.34 2.62 2.62 6.49 15 

2003 298 227 7.631 7.608 0.023 3.8 69.72 0.00 19.79 2.22 2.75 5.50 16 

2003 336 51 7.630 7.608 0.022 3.6 68.47 0.00 20.52 2.31 3.00 5.71 17 

2003 272 433 7.629 7.608 0.021 4.0 70.33 0.00 18.97 2.13 3.29 5.27 18 

2003 354 17 7.627 7.608 0.019 3.6 69.03 0.00 20.69 2.32 2.20 5.75 19 

2003 150 209 7.627 7.608 0.019 3.6 68.19 0.00 20.43 2.30 3.40 5.68 20 
Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Okefenokee (Top 25 Days Over Three Years) 

 % of Modeled Extinction by Species 

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Ranking

2002 351 17 7.699 7.608 0.091 3.6 69.22 0.00 20.74 2.33 1.94 5.77 1 

2002 364 393 7.667 7.608 0.059 3.6 68.77 0.00 20.61 2.32 2.57 5.73 2 

2003 50 51 7.658 7.608 0.050 3.2 67.07 0.00 22.61 2.54 1.49 6.29 3 

2003 9 433 7.657 7.608 0.049 3.5 68.27 0.00 21.04 2.36 2.47 5.85 4 

2002 346 254 7.656 7.608 0.048 3.6 68.75 0.00 20.60 2.31 2.60 5.73 5 

2003 353 68 7.655 7.608 0.047 3.6 68.54 0.00 20.54 2.31 2.90 5.71 6 

2003 191 500 7.654 7.608 0.046 3.7 69.14 0.00 20.16 2.26 2.83 5.61 7 

2003 27 254 7.653 7.608 0.045 3.5 69.20 0.00 21.33 2.40 1.14 5.93 8 

2002 19 464 7.652 7.608 0.044 3.5 68.54 0.00 21.13 2.37 2.07 5.88 9 

2003 210 434 7.652 7.608 0.044 3.7 69.14 0.00 20.16 2.27 2.82 5.61 10 

2003 352 17 7.646 7.608 0.038 3.6 69.52 0.00 20.83 2.34 1.51 5.79 11 

2003 49 254 7.646 7.608 0.038 3.2 66.74 0.00 22.50 2.53 1.98 6.26 12 

2001 221 387 7.645 7.608 0.037 4.1 71.35 0.00 18.77 2.11 2.54 5.22 13 

2001 192 494 7.645 7.608 0.037 3.7 69.58 0.00 20.29 2.28 2.21 5.64 14 

2002 327 17 7.645 7.608 0.037 3.5 68.16 0.00 21.01 2.36 2.62 5.84 15 

2001 65 139 7.644 7.608 0.036 3.1 66.85 0.00 23.26 2.61 0.80 6.47 16 

2002 338 16 7.643 7.608 0.035 3.6 69.04 0.00 20.69 2.32 2.18 5.75 17 

2002 214 357 7.643 7.608 0.035 4.1 71.85 0.00 18.90 2.12 1.86 5.26 18 

2002 202 500 7.643 7.608 0.035 3.7 69.56 0.00 20.28 2.28 2.23 5.64 19 

2001 151 280 7.642 7.608 0.034 3.6 68.57 0.00 20.55 2.31 2.86 5.71 20 

2002 48 139 7.642 7.608 0.034 3.2 66.34 0.00 22.36 2.51 2.56 6.22 21 

2002 182 393 7.641 7.608 0.033 3.7 69.38 0.00 20.23 2.27 2.48 5.63 22 

2003 4 254 7.640 7.608 0.032 3.5 69.04 0.00 21.28 2.39 1.38 5.92 23 

2001 313 499 7.639 7.608 0.031 3.5 68.54 0.00 21.13 2.37 2.07 5.88 24 

2001 234 51 7.638 7.608 0.030 4.1 71.38 0.00 18.78 2.11 2.50 5.22 25 
Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Wolf Island (Top 20 Days for Each Year) 

 % of Modeled Extinction by Species 

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Ranking

2001 222 501 7.62 7.58 0.04 4.1 71.77 0 18.88 2.12 1.96 5.25 1 

2001 240 524 7.61 7.58 0.03 4.1 71.44 0 18.8 2.11 2.42 5.23 2 

2001 313 524 7.605 7.58 0.025 3.5 68.52 0 21.12 2.37 2.12 5.87 3 

2001 37 501 7.6 7.58 0.02 3.1 65.24 0 22.7 2.55 3.2 6.31 4 

2001 195 501 7.598 7.58 0.018 3.7 69.14 0 20.16 2.26 2.82 5.61 5 

2001 223 530 7.597 7.58 0.017 4.1 71.89 0 18.92 2.13 1.8 5.26 6 

2001 325 524 7.596 7.58 0.016 3.5 67.89 0 20.93 2.35 3.01 5.82 7 

2001 221 501 7.596 7.58 0.016 4.1 71.94 0 18.93 2.13 1.73 5.26 8 

2001 242 530 7.595 7.58 0.015 4.1 71.62 0 18.84 2.12 2.17 5.24 9 

2001 194 530 7.595 7.58 0.015 3.7 69.43 0 20.24 2.27 2.42 5.63 10 

2001 193 530 7.594 7.58 0.014 3.7 70.1 0 20.44 2.3 1.48 5.68 11 

2001 188 530 7.593 7.58 0.013 3.7 69.49 0 20.26 2.28 2.32 5.63 12 

2001 187 501 7.593 7.58 0.013 3.7 69.88 0 20.38 2.29 1.77 5.67 13 

2001 364 501 7.592 7.58 0.012 3.5 68.65 0 21.16 2.38 1.92 5.88 14 

2001 336 524 7.592 7.58 0.012 3.5 68.75 0 21.19 2.38 1.77 5.89 15 

2001 137 502 7.592 7.58 0.012 3.3 66.42 0 21.71 2.44 3.39 6.04 16 

2001 265 501 7.591 7.58 0.011 4 71.33 0 19.24 2.16 1.91 5.35 17 

2001 139 530 7.591 7.58 0.011 3.3 67.71 0 22.13 2.49 1.51 6.16 18 

2001 53 518 7.591 7.58 0.011 3.1 66.11 0 23.01 2.58 1.9 6.4 19 

2001 161 501 7.59 7.58 0.01 3.7 69.42 0 20.24 2.27 2.44 5.63 20 

 

2002 202 501 7.604 7.58 0.024 3.7 69.87 0 20.37 2.29 1.8 5.67 1 

2002 255 529 7.601 7.58 0.021 4 71.18 0 19.2 2.16 2.12 5.34 2 

2002 19 501 7.601 7.58 0.021 3.4 68.33 0 21.68 2.44 1.53 6.03 3 

2002 232 530 7.6 7.58 0.02 4.1 71.83 0 18.9 2.12 1.89 5.26 4 

2002 279 524 7.596 7.58 0.016 3.7 69.58 0 20.29 2.28 2.2 5.64 5 

2002 213 529 7.595 7.58 0.015 3.7 69.42 0 20.24 2.27 2.43 5.63 6 

2002 231 524 7.594 7.58 0.014 4.1 71.56 0 18.83 2.12 2.26 5.24 7 

2002 365 501 7.592 7.58 0.012 3.5 69.12 0 21.3 2.39 1.25 5.92 8 

2002 237 501 7.592 7.58 0.012 4.1 71.65 0 18.85 2.12 2.11 5.24 9 

2002 212 530 7.592 7.58 0.012 3.7 69.75 0 20.34 2.28 1.97 5.66 10 

2002 112 529 7.592 7.58 0.012 3 65.17 0 23.43 2.63 2.25 6.52 11 

2002 197 530 7.591 7.58 0.011 3.7 70.07 0 20.43 2.3 1.52 5.68 12 

2002 179 501 7.591 7.58 0.011 3.7 69.68 0 20.32 2.28 2.05 5.65 13 

2002 10 529 7.59 7.58 0.011 3.4 67.59 0 21.44 2.41 2.59 5.96 14 

2002 338 501 7.59 7.58 0.01 3.5 67.89 0 20.93 2.35 2.99 5.82 15 

2002 113 530 7.59 7.58 0.01 3 65.47 0 23.54 2.65 1.78 6.55 16 

2002 20 524 7.59 7.58 0.01 3.4 68.69 0 21.8 2.45 1.01 6.06 17 

2002 358 524 7.589 7.58 0.009 3.5 68.68 0 21.17 2.38 1.87 5.89 18 

2002 238 530 7.589 7.58 0.009 4.1 71.99 0 18.94 2.13 1.66 5.27 19 

2002 364 501 7.588 7.58 0.008 3.5 69.31 0 21.36 2.4 0.99 5.94 20 

 

2003 20 502 7.608 7.58 0.028 3.4 67.14 0 21.3 2.39 3.23 5.92 1 

2003 298 530 7.605 7.58 0.025 3.7 69.4 0 20.23 2.27 2.47 5.63 2 

2003 211 530 7.601 7.58 0.021 3.7 69.38 0 20.23 2.27 2.5 5.63 3 

2003 10 502 7.597 7.58 0.017 3.4 68.11 0 21.61 2.43 1.84 6.01 4 

2003 191 501 7.596 7.58 0.016 3.7 69.71 0 20.33 2.28 2.02 5.65 5 

2003 199 501 7.594 7.58 0.014 3.7 70.04 0 20.42 2.29 1.56 5.68 6 

2003 192 530 7.594 7.58 0.014 3.7 69.28 0 20.2 2.27 2.63 5.62 7 

2003 19 518 7.592 7.58 0.012 3.4 68.48 0 21.73 2.44 1.31 6.04 8 

2003 202 530 7.591 7.58 0.011 3.7 69.52 0 20.27 2.28 2.3 5.64 9 

2003 295 530 7.59 7.58 0.01 3.7 70.36 0 20.51 2.3 1.12 5.7 10 

2003 161 502 7.59 7.58 0.01 3.7 70.03 0 20.42 2.29 1.58 5.68 11 

2003 27 518 7.59 7.58 0.01 3.4 68.45 0 21.72 2.44 1.37 6.04 12 

2003 210 501 7.589 7.58 0.009 3.7 70.01 0 20.41 2.29 1.58 5.68 13 

2003 123 501 7.589 7.58 0.009 3.3 67.63 0 22.11 2.48 1.61 6.15 14 

2003 101 518 7.589 7.58 0.009 3 66.27 0 23.83 2.68 0.58 6.63 15 

2003 33 524 7.589 7.58 0.009 3.1 65.5 0 22.79 2.56 2.81 6.34 16 

2003 34 501 7.587 7.58 0.007 3.1 66.09 0 23 2.58 1.93 6.4 17 

2003 218 530 7.586 7.58 0.006 4.1 71.83 0 18.9 2.12 1.88 5.26 18 

2003 153 501 7.586 7.58 0.006 3.7 69.75 0 20.34 2.29 1.97 5.66 19 

2003 44 501 7.586 7.58 0.006 3.1 65.83 0 22.91 2.57 2.31 6.37 20 
Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Wolf Island (Top 25 Days Over Three Years) 

 % of Modeled Extinction by Species 

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Ranking

2001 222 501 7.620 7.580 0.040 4.1 71.77 0.00 18.88 2.12 1.96 5.25 1 

2001 240 524 7.610 7.580 0.030 4.1 71.44 0.00 18.80 2.11 2.42 5.23 2 

2003 20 502 7.608 7.580 0.028 3.4 67.14 0.00 21.30 2.39 3.23 5.92 3 

2001 313 524 7.605 7.580 0.025 3.5 68.52 0.00 21.12 2.37 2.12 5.87 4 

2003 298 530 7.605 7.580 0.025 3.7 69.40 0.00 20.23 2.27 2.47 5.63 5 

2002 202 501 7.604 7.580 0.024 3.7 69.87 0.00 20.37 2.29 1.80 5.67 6 

2002 255 529 7.601 7.580 0.021 4.0 71.18 0.00 19.20 2.16 2.12 5.34 7 

2002 19 501 7.601 7.580 0.021 3.4 68.33 0.00 21.68 2.44 1.53 6.03 8 

2003 211 530 7.601 7.580 0.021 3.7 69.38 0.00 20.23 2.27 2.50 5.63 9 

2001 37 501 7.600 7.580 0.020 3.1 65.24 0.00 22.70 2.55 3.20 6.31 10 

2002 232 530 7.600 7.580 0.020 4.1 71.83 0.00 18.90 2.12 1.89 5.26 11 

2001 195 501 7.598 7.580 0.018 3.7 69.14 0.00 20.16 2.26 2.82 5.61 12 

2001 223 530 7.597 7.580 0.017 4.1 71.89 0.00 18.92 2.13 1.80 5.26 13 

2003 10 502 7.597 7.580 0.017 3.4 68.11 0.00 21.61 2.43 1.84 6.01 14 

2001 325 524 7.596 7.580 0.016 3.5 67.89 0.00 20.93 2.35 3.01 5.82 15 

2001 221 501 7.596 7.580 0.016 4.1 71.94 0.00 18.93 2.13 1.73 5.26 16 

2002 279 524 7.596 7.580 0.016 3.7 69.58 0.00 20.29 2.28 2.20 5.64 17 

2003 191 501 7.596 7.580 0.016 3.7 69.71 0.00 20.33 2.28 2.02 5.65 18 

2001 242 530 7.595 7.580 0.015 4.1 71.62 0.00 18.84 2.12 2.17 5.24 19 

2001 194 530 7.595 7.580 0.015 3.7 69.43 0.00 20.24 2.27 2.42 5.63 20 

2002 213 529 7.595 7.580 0.015 3.7 69.42 0.00 20.24 2.27 2.43 5.63 21 

2001 193 530 7.594 7.580 0.014 3.7 70.10 0.00 20.44 2.30 1.48 5.68 22 

2002 231 524 7.594 7.580 0.014 4.1 71.56 0.00 18.83 2.12 2.26 5.24 23 

2003 199 501 7.594 7.580 0.014 3.7 70.04 0.00 20.42 2.29 1.56 5.68 24 

2003 192 530 7.594 7.580 0.014 3.7 69.28 0.00 20.20 2.27 2.63 5.62 25 
Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Saint Marks (Top 20 Days for Each Year) 

 % of Modeled Extinction by Species 

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Ranking

2001 23 629 7.73 7.669 0.062 3.7 69.55 0 20.28 2.28 2.25 5.64 1 

2001 270 531 7.723 7.669 0.055 4.2 71.61 0 18.39 2.07 2.82 5.12 2 

2001 17 541 7.718 7.669 0.049 3.7 69.25 0 20.19 2.27 2.67 5.62 3 

2001 3 537 7.712 7.669 0.044 3.7 70.13 0 20.45 2.3 1.43 5.69 4 

2001 337 628 7.707 7.669 0.039 3.8 70.33 0 19.97 2.24 1.9 5.55 5 

2001 24 532 7.708 7.669 0.039 3.7 68.85 0 20.07 2.26 3.24 5.58 6 

2001 109 619 7.705 7.669 0.037 3.4 68.31 0 21.67 2.44 1.55 6.03 7 

2001 300 628 7.705 7.669 0.036 3.8 70.45 0 20 2.25 1.75 5.56 8 

2001 22 628 7.704 7.669 0.036 3.7 69.95 0 20.39 2.29 1.69 5.67 9 

2001 49 596 7.703 7.669 0.034 3.4 68.13 0 21.62 2.43 1.81 6.01 10 

2001 269 628 7.7 7.669 0.032 4.2 71.85 0 18.46 2.07 2.48 5.13 11 

2001 276 629 7.7 7.669 0.031 3.8 69.34 0 19.69 2.21 3.29 5.47 12 

2001 68 546 7.7 7.669 0.031 3.4 66.81 0 21.2 2.38 3.72 5.89 13 

2001 291 629 7.699 7.669 0.03 3.8 70.11 0 19.9 2.24 2.22 5.53 14 

2001 144 573 7.698 7.669 0.03 3.5 68.34 0 21.06 2.37 2.38 5.86 15 

2001 360 542 7.697 7.669 0.028 3.8 69.53 0 19.74 2.22 3.02 5.49 16 

2001 4 541 7.697 7.669 0.028 3.7 69.22 0 20.18 2.27 2.72 5.61 17 

2001 176 550 7.695 7.669 0.026 4 70.41 0 18.99 2.13 3.19 5.28 18 

2001 35 626 7.694 7.669 0.026 3.4 67.53 0 21.43 2.41 2.68 5.96 19 

2001 344 541 7.693 7.669 0.024 3.8 70.03 0 19.88 2.23 2.33 5.53 20 

 

2002 331 542 7.754 7.669 0.085 3.7 68.99 0 20.11 2.26 3.05 5.59 1 

2002 2 592 7.74 7.669 0.072 3.7 69.37 0 20.23 2.27 2.5 5.62 2 

2002 305 629 7.728 7.669 0.06 3.8 70.12 0 19.91 2.24 2.21 5.54 3 

2002 328 628 7.727 7.669 0.058 3.7 69.28 0 20.2 2.27 2.63 5.62 4 

2002 341 628 7.725 7.669 0.056 3.8 69.97 0 19.87 2.23 2.4 5.52 5 

2002 34 629 7.724 7.669 0.056 3.4 68.11 0 21.61 2.43 1.84 6.01 6 

2002 307 537 7.717 7.669 0.049 3.7 69.72 0 20.33 2.28 2.01 5.65 7 

2002 201 541 7.718 7.669 0.049 4.1 70.83 0 18.64 2.09 3.26 5.18 8 

2002 169 629 7.717 7.669 0.048 4 70.72 0 19.07 2.14 2.76 5.3 9 

2002 362 546 7.715 7.669 0.047 3.8 69.49 0 19.73 2.22 3.07 5.49 10 

2002 45 628 7.711 7.669 0.042 3.4 67.13 0 21.3 2.39 3.25 5.92 11 

2002 44 546 7.71 7.669 0.042 3.4 67.52 0 21.42 2.41 2.7 5.96 12 

2002 336 628 7.706 7.669 0.037 3.8 70.09 0 19.9 2.24 2.24 5.53 13 

2002 200 614 7.704 7.669 0.035 4.1 70.95 0 18.67 2.1 3.1 5.19 14 

2002 70 631 7.702 7.669 0.033 3.4 68.1 0 21.61 2.43 1.85 6.01 15 

2002 96 546 7.7 7.669 0.031 3.4 67.17 0 21.31 2.39 3.2 5.93 16 

2002 312 628 7.697 7.669 0.028 3.7 69.16 0 20.16 2.27 2.8 5.61 17 

2002 281 631 7.696 7.669 0.028 3.8 70.33 0 19.97 2.24 1.9 5.55 18 

2002 334 631 7.696 7.669 0.027 3.7 68.8 0 20.06 2.25 3.31 5.58 19 

2002 352 628 7.695 7.669 0.026 3.8 69.8 0 19.82 2.23 2.65 5.51 20 

 

2003 343 619 7.746 7.669 0.078 3.8 69.75 0 19.8 2.22 2.72 5.51 1 

2003 360 541 7.74 7.669 0.071 3.8 70.18 0 19.92 2.24 2.12 5.54 2 

2003 83 537 7.729 7.669 0.06 3.4 66.9 0 21.23 2.38 3.59 5.9 3 

2003 16 593 7.728 7.669 0.059 3.7 69.6 0 20.29 2.28 2.19 5.64 4 

2003 8 629 7.718 7.669 0.05 3.7 68.88 0 20.08 2.26 3.2 5.58 5 

2003 342 532 7.712 7.669 0.044 3.8 69.72 0 19.79 2.22 2.76 5.5 6 

2003 149 626 7.71 7.669 0.042 3.5 67.58 0 20.83 2.34 3.46 5.79 7 

2003 313 537 7.709 7.669 0.04 3.7 69.55 0 20.28 2.28 2.26 5.64 8 

2003 12 593 7.709 7.669 0.04 3.7 69.08 0 20.14 2.26 2.92 5.6 9 

2003 325 619 7.708 7.669 0.039 3.7 69.52 0 20.27 2.28 2.29 5.64 10 

2003 43 542 7.708 7.669 0.039 3.4 66.98 0 21.25 2.39 3.47 5.91 11 

2003 25 631 7.707 7.669 0.039 3.7 70.01 0 20.41 2.29 1.61 5.68 12 

2003 350 628 7.702 7.669 0.034 3.8 69.92 0 19.85 2.23 2.48 5.52 13 

2003 289 628 7.702 7.669 0.034 3.8 70.37 0 19.98 2.24 1.85 5.56 14 

2003 37 540 7.702 7.669 0.033 3.4 67.93 0 21.55 2.42 2.1 5.99 15 

2003 312 628 7.701 7.669 0.032 3.7 69.1 0 20.15 2.26 2.89 5.6 16 

2003 252 631 7.701 7.669 0.032 4.2 72.04 0 18.5 2.08 2.24 5.15 17 

2003 28 629 7.699 7.669 0.031 3.7 69.73 0 20.33 2.28 2 5.65 18 

2003 276 537 7.699 7.669 0.03 3.8 70.49 0 20.01 2.25 1.69 5.56 19 

2003 251 537 7.698 7.669 0.03 4.2 73.03 0 18.76 2.11 0.89 5.22 20 
Ranked Daily Visibility Change for Saint Marks (Top 25 Days Over Three Years) 

 % of Modeled Extinction by Species 

YEAR DAY REC DV(Total) DV(BKG) DELTA DV F(RH) %_SO4 %_NO3 %_OC %_EC %_PMC %_PMF Ranking

2002 331 542 7.754 7.669 0.085 3.7 68.99 0.00 20.11 2.26 3.05 5.59 1 

2003 343 619 7.746 7.669 0.078 3.8 69.75 0.00 19.80 2.22 2.72 5.51 2 

2002 2 592 7.740 7.669 0.072 3.7 69.37 0.00 20.23 2.27 2.50 5.62 3 

2003 360 541 7.740 7.669 0.071 3.8 70.18 0.00 19.92 2.24 2.12 5.54 4 

2001 23 629 7.730 7.669 0.062 3.7 69.55 0.00 20.28 2.28 2.25 5.64 5 

2002 305 629 7.728 7.669 0.060 3.8 70.12 0.00 19.91 2.24 2.21 5.54 6 

2003 83 537 7.729 7.669 0.060 3.4 66.90 0.00 21.23 2.38 3.59 5.90 7 

2003 16 593 7.728 7.669 0.059 3.7 69.60 0.00 20.29 2.28 2.19 5.64 8 

2002 328 628 7.727 7.669 0.058 3.7 69.28 0.00 20.20 2.27 2.63 5.62 9 

2002 341 628 7.725 7.669 0.056 3.8 69.97 0.00 19.87 2.23 2.40 5.52 10 

2002 34 629 7.724 7.669 0.056 3.4 68.11 0.00 21.61 2.43 1.84 6.01 11 

2001 270 531 7.723 7.669 0.055 4.2 71.61 0.00 18.39 2.07 2.82 5.12 12 

2003 8 629 7.718 7.669 0.050 3.7 68.88 0.00 20.08 2.26 3.20 5.58 13 

2001 17 541 7.718 7.669 0.049 3.7 69.25 0.00 20.19 2.27 2.67 5.62 14 

2002 307 537 7.717 7.669 0.049 3.7 69.72 0.00 20.33 2.28 2.01 5.65 15 

2002 201 541 7.718 7.669 0.049 4.1 70.83 0.00 18.64 2.09 3.26 5.18 16 

2002 169 629 7.717 7.669 0.048 4.0 70.72 0.00 19.07 2.14 2.76 5.30 17 

2002 362 546 7.715 7.669 0.047 3.8 69.49 0.00 19.73 2.22 3.07 5.49 18 

2001 3 537 7.712 7.669 0.044 3.7 70.13 0.00 20.45 2.30 1.43 5.69 19 

2003 342 532 7.712 7.669 0.044 3.8 69.72 0.00 19.79 2.22 2.76 5.50 20 

2002 45 628 7.711 7.669 0.042 3.4 67.13 0.00 21.30 2.39 3.25 5.92 21 

2002 44 546 7.710 7.669 0.042 3.4 67.52 0.00 21.42 2.41 2.70 5.96 22 

2003 149 626 7.710 7.669 0.042 3.5 67.58 0.00 20.83 2.34 3.46 5.79 23 

2003 313 537 7.709 7.669 0.040 3.7 69.55 0.00 20.28 2.28 2.26 5.64 24 

2003 12 593 7.709 7.669 0.040 3.7 69.08 0.00 20.14 2.26 2.92 5.60 25