C-148 Figure C-73b. CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km Actual base case model performance for the Best 20 percent days at Dolly Sods (DOSO), West Virginia for Soil (top left), CM (top right), Sea Salt (bottom left) and Total Bext (bottom right).C-149 Figure C-74. Bugle Plots of Fractional Bias and Fractional Gross Error for DOSO and the Best 20 Percent Days.C-150 2.3.15.2 DOSO Worst 20 Percent Days

Figure C-75a. CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km Actual base case model performance for the Worst 20 percent days at Dolly Sods (DOSO), West Virginia for SO4 (top left), NO3 (top right), OMC (bottom left) and EC (bottom right).C-151 Figure C-75b. CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km Actual base case model performance for the Worst 20 percent days at Dolly Sods (DOSO), West Virginia for Soil (top left), CM (top right), Sea Salt (bottom left) and Total Bext (bottom right).C-152 Figure C-76. Bugle Plots of Fractional Bias and Fractional Gross Error for DOSO and the Worst 20 Percent Days.C-153 2.3.15.3 DOSO for All Days

Figure C-77. Time series of predicted and obser ved SO4, NO3, OM C, EC, Soil, CM,

Sea Salt and PM 2.5 mass across all monitoring days at Dolly Sods (DOSO), West Virginia for

the CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km base case simulation.C-154 Figure C-77. (concluded) Time series of pred icted and observed SO4, NO3, OMC, EC, Soil, CM, Sea Salt and PM 2.5 mass across all monitoring days at Dolly Sods (DOSO), West Virginia for the CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km base case simulation.C-155 2.3.16 Breton Island Wildlife Re fuge (BRET), Louisiana

2.3.16.1 BRET Best 20 Percent Days

Figure C-78a. CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km Actual base case model performance for the Best 20 percent days at Breton (BRET), Louisiana for SO4 (top left), NO3 (top right), OMC (bottom left) and EC (bottom right).C-156 Figure C-78b. CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km Actual base case model performance for the Best 20 percent days at Breton (BRET), Louisiana for Soil (top left), CM (top right), Sea Salt (bottom left) and Total Bext (bottom right).C-157 Figure C-79. Bugle Plots of Fractional Bias and Fractional Gross Error for BRET and the Best 20 Percent Days.C-158 2.3.16.2 BRET Worst 20 Percent Days

Figure C-80a. CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km Actual base case model performance for the Worst 20 percent days at Breton (BRET), Louisiana for SO4 (top left), NO3 (top right), OMC (bottom left) and EC (bottom right).C-159 Figure C-80b. CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km Actual base case model performance for the Worst 20 percent days at Breton (BRET), Louisiana for Soil (top left), CM (top right), Sea Salt (bottom left) and Total Bext (bottom right).C-160 Figure C-81. Bugle Plots of Fractional Bias and Fractional Gross Error for BRET and the Worst 20 Percent Days.C-161 2.3.16.3 BRET for All DaysC-162 Figure C-82. Time series of predicted and obser ved SO4, NO3, OM C, EC, Soil, CM,

Sea Salt and PM 2.5 mass across all monitoring days at Breton (BRET), Louisiana for the

CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km base case simulation.C-163 2.3.17 Caney Creek Wilderness Area (CACR), Arkansas

2.3.17.1 CACR Best 20 Percent Days

Figure C-83a. CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km Actual base case model performance for the Best 20 percent days at Caney Creek (CACR), Arkansas for SO4 (top left), NO3 (top right), OMC (bottom left) and EC (bottom right).C-164 Figure C-83b. CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km Actual base case model performance for the Best 20 percent days at Caney Creek (CACR), Arkansas for Soil (top left), CM (top right), Sea Salt (bottom left) and Total Bext (bottom right).C-165 Figure C-84. Bugle Plots of Fractional Bias and Fractional Gross Error for CACR and the Best 20 Percent Days.C-166 2.3.17.2 CACR Worst 20 Percent Days

Figure C-85a. CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km Actual base case model performance for the Worst 20 percent days at Caney Creek (CACR), Arkansas for SO4 (top left), NO3 (top right), OMC (bottom left) and EC (bottom right).C-167 Figure C-85b. CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km Actual base case model performance for the Worst 20 percent days at Caney Creek (CACR), Arkansas for Soil (top left), CM (top right), Sea Salt (bottom left) and Total Bext (bottom right).C-168 Figure C-86. Bugle Plots of Fractional Bias and Fractional Gross Error for CACR and the Worst 20 Percent Days.C-169 2.3.17.3 CACR for All DaysC-170 Figure C-87. Time series of predicted and obser ved SO4, NO3, OM C, EC, Soil, CM,

Sea Salt and PM 2.5 mass across all monitoring days at Caney Creek (CACR), Arkansas for the

CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km base case simulation.C-171 2.3.18 Upper Buffalo Wilderness Area (UPBU), Arkansas

2.3.18.1 UPBU Best 20 Percent Days

Figure C-88a. CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km Actual base case model performance for the Best 20 percent days at Upper Buffalo (UPBU), Arkansas for SO4 (top left), NO3 (top right), OMC (bottom left) and EC (bottom right).C-172 Figure C-88b. CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km Actual base case model performance for the Best 20 percent days at Upper Buffalo (UPBU), Arkansas for Soil (top left), CM (top right), Sea Salt (bottom left) and Total Bext (bottom right).C-173 Figure C-89. Bugle Plots of Fractional Bias and Fractional Gross Error for UPBU and the Best 20 Percent Days.C-174 2.3.18.2 UPBU Worst 20 Percent Days

Figure C-90a. CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km Actual base case model performance for the Worst 20 percent days at Upper Buffalo (UPBU), Arkansas for SO4 (top left), NO3 (top right), OMC (bottom left) and EC (bottom right).C-175 Figure C-90b. CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km Actual base case model performance for the Worst 20 percent days at Upper Buffalo (UPBU), Arkansas for Soil (top left), CM (top right), Sea Salt (bottom left) and Total Bext (bottom right).C-176 Figure C-91. Bugle Plots of Fractional Bias and Fractional Gross Error for UPBU and the Worst 20 Percent Days.C-177 2.3.18.3 UPBU for All Days

Figure C-92. Time series of predicted and obser ved SO4, NO3, OM C, EC, Soil, CM,

Sea Salt and PM 2.5 mass across all monitoring days at Upper Buffalo (UPBU), Arkansas for the

CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km base case simulation.C-178 Figure C-92. (concluded) Time series of pred icted and observed SO4, NO3, OMC, EC, Soil, CM, Sea Salt and PM 2.5 mass across all monitoring days at Upper Buffalo (UPBU),

Arkansas for the CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km base case simulation.C-179 2.3.19 Mingo Wildlife Refuge (MING), Missouri

Figure C-

 96... . 

. .

ٛ ๓ ๓ 〃

ٛٛٛٛٛٛ MING Best 20 Percent Days

Figure C-93a. CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km Actual base case model performance for the Best 20 percent days at Mingo (MING), Missouri for SO 4 (top left), NO3 (top right), OMC (bottom left) and EC (bottom right).C-180 Figure C-93b. CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km Actual base case model performance for the Best 20 percent days at Mingo (MING), Missouri for Soil (top left), CM (top right), Sea Salt (bottom left) and Total Bext (bottom right).C-181 Figure C-94. Bugle Plots of Fractional Bias and Fractional Gross Error for MING and the Best 20 Percent Days.C-182 2.3.19.2 MING Worst 20 Percent Days

Figure C-95a. CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km Actual base case model performance for the Worst 20 percent days at Mingo (MING), Missouri for SO 4 (top left), NO3 (top right), OMC (bottom left) and EC (bottom right).C-183 Figure C-95b. CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km Actual base case model performance for the Worst 20 percent days at Mingo (MING), Missouri for Soil (top left), CM (top right), Sea Salt (bottom left) and Total Bext (bottom right).C-184 Figure C-96. Bugle Plots of Fractional Bias and Fractional Gross Error for MING and the Worst 20 Percent Days.C-185 2.3.19.3 MING for All Days

Figure C-97. Time series of predicted and obser ved SO4, NO3, OM C, EC, Soil, CM,

Sea Salt and PM 2.5 mass across all monitoring days at Mingo (MING), Missouri for the CMAQ

2002 Base G2 12 km base case simulation.C-186 Figure C-97. (concluded) Time series of pred icted and observed SO4, NO3, OMC, EC, Soil, CM, Sea Salt and PM 2.5 mass across all monitoring days at Mingo (MING), Missouri for

the CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km base case simulation.C-187 2.3.20 Hercules Glade Wilderness Area (HEGL), Missouri

2.3.20.1 HEGL Best 20 Percent Days

Figure C-98a. CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km Actual base case model performance for the Best 20 percent days at Hercules Glade (HEGL), Missouri for SO4 (top left), NO3 (top right), OMC (bottom left) and EC (bottom right).C-188 Figure C-98b. CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km Actual base case model performance for the Best 20 percent days at Hercules Glade (HEGL), Missouri for Soil (top left), CM (top right), Sea Salt (bottom left) and Total Bext (bottom right).C-189 Figure C-99. Bugle Plots of Fractional Bias and Fractional Gross Error for HEGL and the Best 20 Percent Days.C-190 2.3.20.2 HEGL Worst 20 Percent Days

Figure C-100a. CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km Actual base case model performance for the Worst 20 percent days at Hercules Glade (HEGL), Missouri for SO4 (top left), NO3 (top right), OMC (bottom left) and EC (bottom right).C-191 Figure C-100b. CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km Actual base case model performance for the Worst 20 percent days at Hercules Glade (HEGL), Missouri for Soil (top left), CM (top right), Sea Salt (bottom left) and Total Bext (bottom right).C-192 Figure C-101. Bugle Plots of Fractional Bias and Fractional Gross Error for HEGL and the Worst 20 Percent Days.C-193 2.3.20.3 HEGL for All Days

Figure C-102. Time series of predicted and obser ved SO4, NO3, OM C, EC, Soil, CM,

Sea Salt and PM 2.5 mass across all monitoring days at Hercules Glade (HEGL), Missouri for

the CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km base case simulation.C-194 Figure C-102. (concluded) Time series of pred icted and observed SO4, NO3, OMC, EC, Soil, CM, Sea Salt and PM 2.5 mass across all monitoring days at Hercules Glade (HEGL),

Missouri for the CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km base case simulation.C-195 2.3.21 Brigantine Wildlife Refuge (BRIG), New Jersey

2.3.21.1 BRIG Best 20 Percent Days

Figure C-103a. CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km Actual base case model performance for the Best 20 percent days at Brigantine (BRIG), New Je rsey for SO4 (top left), NO3 (top right), OMC (bottom left) and EC (bottom right).C-196 Figure C-103b. CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km Actual base case model performance for the Best 20 percent days at Brigantine (BRIG), New Jersey for Soil (top left), CM (top right), Sea Salt (bottom left) and Total Bext (bottom right).C-197 Figure C-104. Bugle Plots of Fractional Bias and Fractional Gross Error for BRIG and the Best 20 Percent Days.C-198 2.3.21.2 BRIG Worst 20 Percent Days

Figure C-105a. CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km Actual base case model performance for the Worst 20 percent days at Brigantine (BRIG), New Jersey for SO4 (top left), NO3 (top right), OMC (bottom left) and EC (bottom right).C-199 Figure C-105b. CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km Actual base case model performance for the Worst 20 percent days at Brigantine (BRIG), New Jersey for Soil (top left), CM (top right), Sea Salt (bottom left) and Total Bext (bottom right).C-200 Figure C-106. Bugle Plots of Fractional Bias and Fractional Gross Error for BGIG and the Worst 20 Percent Days.C-201 2.3.21.3 BRIG for All Days

Figure C-107. Time series of predicted and obser ved SO4, NO3, OM C, EC, Soil, CM,

Sea Salt and PM 2.5 mass across all monitoring days at Brigantine (BRIG), New Jersey for the

CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km base case simulation.C-202 Figure C-107. (concluded) Time series of pred icted and observed SO4, NO3, OMC, EC, Soil, CM, Sea Salt and PM 2.5 mass across all monitoring days at Brigantine (BRIG), New Jersey for the CMAQ 2002 Base G2 12 km base case simulation.APPENDIX D

Air Quality Model

Performance Evaluation:

Spatial Maps of Model Performance on the Best and Worst 20 Percent Days

at VISTAS and Nearby Class I Areas

### D. SPATIAL PLOTS

The 12km domain spatial plots of model-simulate d daily concentration of the constituents of particle pollution most responsible for light extinction for 2002, with the actual observed concentrations overlaid are presented in this section. These plots are presented for the entire 12km domain. The 20 percent best and 20 percent worst days used in calculating light extinction for the IMPROVE monitoring sites representative of the VISTA’s Class I Federal areas are presented he re. Table C-1 in Appendix C of Appendix F lists the 20 percent best and worst days for all of the VISTA’s Class I Federal areas, including Cape Romain.

There are three pages of overlays for each date identified as a 20 percent best or 20 percent worst day for any of the Class I Fe deral Area. The first page for each date contains the spatial plots for sulfate (SO 4 ), nitrate (NO 3 ), ammonium (NH 4 ), and organic carbon (OC). The second page contains pl ots for elemental carbon (EC), coarse matter (CM), sea salt, and the soil constituent of fine particulate matter. The third page in the series is a plot of total fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ). A table immediately follows the plot of total reconstructed particulate matter, which details whether that particular date was a 20 percent best or 20 percent worst day in each of the Class I Federal areas. The color scale for all of the plots moves from lower concentrations in shade of blue to warmer colors for higher ozone concentrations.

Across the 12km modeling domain, the general sp atial pattern of peaks and valleys of sulfate concentrations were well represen ted. Gradients across South Carolina were generally well captured. Ther e was some tendency for under-p rediction or displacement of peaks especially on days w ith complex gradient. There was a tendency for the model to perform better on days with wide spread high sulfate concentrations.

For nitrates, there were some issues with capturing the exact magnitude of peaks and minimum concentrations in the modeling. Ho wever, the spatial pa ttern was captured reasonably well, even with the typically low concentration seen across the southeast. Ammonium model performance was similar, as there were issues capturing the exact magnitudes of minimums and maximums, but wi th generally good spatial pattern capture.

Organic carbon had well captured spatial patterns with only a slight issue in capturing peak values, which were usually just slightly displaced from observed values. The model

also seemed to have a weak er concentration gradient th an suggested by observations. Elemental carbon generally had low values, with some isolated high values likely due to large sources (or large urban areas) with minimal plume dispersion, which were not captured with the IMPROVE monitoring observations.

Coarse matter pattern is not handled as well as other species, especially with respect to capturing finer concentration gradients. The observations along the Appalachian Mountains from late spring through summer are not captured well, as peak values are

often missed. However, at this same time, concentrations to the northwest are captured well. By the fall, concentrations lower, and are better represen ted. Sea salt model

________________________________________________________________________ D-1________________________________________________________________________ D-2 performance is a little hard to quantify, as there are few observation throughout 2002 to base an analysis. Generally concentrations are low, with most peaks occurring near the coast, which at least follow natural logic. The model predicted peaks near the shore usually do not reach as high as the available observations, but further support the model produced pattern.

The soil component of partic ulate matter is generally over predicted, esp ecially peaks through the Midwestern states. The model s hows some grasp of the pattern of soil

concentrations, but with actua l magnitudes of peak values over predicted. The model

seems to do better with lower concen trations through th e coastal states.

For reconstructed fine particulate matter, the overall pattern is gene rally predicted well, with a slight under-prediction of peak values. Widespread ev ents are generally captured well (especially June 4 th , 10 th , and 19 th ). Performance during the summer seems especially well captured as well.D-3 D.1 January 5, 2002

Date Julian Day Type Class I Areas Affected

01/05/02 5 W20% CHAS, EVER, SWAN, HEGL

01/05/02 5 B20% LIGO, SHRO, SHEN, DOSO

Figure D-1: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Sulfate (SO4) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Nitrate (NO3) Component Concentrations (top right), Daily Average Ammonium (NH4) Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Organic Carbon (OC) Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For January 5, 2002D-4 Figure D-2: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Elemental Carbon (EC) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Coarse Particle Mass (CM) Component Concentrations (to p right), Daily Average Sea Salt Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Soil Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For January 5, 2002D-5 Figure D-3: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Total Fine Particulate Matter (PM25) Concentration Spatial Plots For January 5, 2002D-6 D.2 January 8, 2002

Date Julian Day Type Class I Areas Affected

01/08/02 8 W20%

01/08/02 8 B20% LIGO, SHRO, GRSM, JARI, BRET

Figure D-4: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Sulfate (SO4) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Nitrate (NO3) Component Concentrations (top right), Daily Average Ammonium (NH4) Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Organic Carbon (OC) Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For January 8, 2002D-7 Figure D-5: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Elemental Carbon (EC) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Coarse Particle Mass (CM) Component Concentrations (to p right), Daily Average Sea Salt Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Soil Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For January 8, 2002D-8 Figure D-6: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Total Fine Particulate Matter (PM25) Concentration Spatial Plots For January 8, 2002D-9 D.3 January 11, 2002

Date Julian Day Type Class I Areas Affected

01/11/02 11 W20%

01/11/02 11 B20% LIGO, SHRO, GRSM, JARI, SIPS, SAMA, OKEF,

CACR

Figure D-7: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Sulfate (SO4) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Nitrate (NO3) Component Concentrations (top right), Daily Average Ammonium (NH4) Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Organic Carbon (OC) Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For January 11, 2002D-10 Figure D-8: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Elemental Carbon (EC) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Coarse Particle Mass (CM) Component Concentrations (to p right), Daily Average Sea Salt Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Soil Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For January 11, 2002D-11 Figure D-9: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Total Fine Particulate Matter (PM25) Concentration Spatial Plots For January 11, 2002D-12 D.4 January 14, 2002

Date Julian Day Type Class I Areas Affected

01/14/02 14 W20%

01/14/02 14 B20% GRSM, SIPS, SAMA, CACR, BRET, SHEN, DOSO, SWAN, HEGL, MACA, ROMA, UPBU,

MING

Figure D-10: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Sulfate (SO4) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Nitrate (NO3) Component Concentrations (top right), Daily Average Ammonium (NH4) ComponentD-13 Concentrations, And Daily Average Organic Carbon (OC) Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For January 14, 2002

Figure D-11: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Elemental Carbon (EC) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Coarse Particle Mass (CM) Component Concentrations (to p right), Daily Average Sea Salt Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Soil Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For January 14, 2002D-14 Figure D-12: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Total Fine Particulate Matter (PM25) Concentration Spatial Plots For January 14, 2002D-15 D.5 January 17, 2002

Date Julian Day Type Class I Areas Affected

01/17/02 17 W20% OKEF, CHAS, ROMA

01/17/02 17 B20%

Figure D-13: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Sulfate (SO4) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Nitrate (NO3) Component Concentrations (top right), Daily Average Ammonium (NH4) Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Organic Carbon (OC) Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For January 17, 2002D-16 Figure D-14: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Elemental Carbon (EC) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Coarse Particle Mass (CM) Component Concentrations (to p right), Daily Average Sea Salt Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Soil Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For January 17, 2002D-17 Figure D-15: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Total Fine Particulate Matter (PM25) Concentration Spatial Plots For January 17, 2002D-18 D.6 January 20, 2002

Date Julian Day Type Class I Areas Affected

01/20/02 20 W20% MING, BRIG

01/20/02 20 B20% SAMA, OKEF, BRET

Figure D-16: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Sulfate (SO4) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Nitrate (NO3) Component Concentrations (top right), Daily Average Ammonium (NH4) Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Organic Carbon (OC) Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For January 20, 2002D-19 Figure D-17: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Elemental Carbon (EC) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Coarse Particle Mass (CM) Component Concentrations (to p right), Daily Average Sea Salt Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Soil Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For January 20, 2002D-20 Figure D-18: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Total Fine Particulate Matter (PM25) Concentration Spatial Plots For January 20, 2002D-21 D.7 January 23, 2002

Date Julian Day Type Class I Areas Affected

01/23/02 23 W20% OKEF

01/23/02 23 B20% LIGO, GRSM, JARI, SHEN, DOSO, EVER, COHU, MACA, ROMA

Figure D-19: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Sulfate (SO4) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Nitrate (NO3) Component Concentrations (top right), Daily Average Ammonium (NH4) Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Organic Carbon (OC) Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For January 23, 2002D-22 Figure D-20: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Elemental Carbon (EC) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Coarse Particle Mass (CM) Component Concentrations (to p right), Daily Average Sea Salt Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Soil Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For January 23, 2002D-23 Figure D-21: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Total Fine Particulate Matter (PM25) Concentration Spatial Plots For January 23, 2002D-24 D.8 January 26, 2002

Date Julian Day Type Class I Areas Affected

01/26/02 26 W20% CHAS

01/26/02 26 B20% LIGO, SHRO, JARI, SIPS, CACR, SHEN, DOSO, SWAN, HEGL, COHU, UPBU

Figure D-22: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Sulfate (SO4) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Nitrate (NO3) Component Concentrations (top right), Daily Average Ammonium (NH4) Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Organic Carbon (OC) Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For January 26, 2002D-25 Figure D-23: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Elemental Carbon (EC) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Coarse Particle Mass (CM) Component Concentrations (to p right), Daily Average Sea Salt Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Soil Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For January 26, 2002D-26 Figure D-24: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Total Fine Particulate Matter (PM25) Concentration Spatial Plots For January 26, 2002D-27 D.9 January 29, 2002

Date Julian Day Type Class I Areas Affected

01/29/02 29 W20% ROMA

01/29/02 29 B20% EVER

Figure D-25: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Sulfate (SO4) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Nitrate (NO3) Component Concentrations (top right), Daily Average Ammonium (NH4) Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Organic Carbon (OC) Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For January 29, 2002D-28 Figure D-26: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Elemental Carbon (EC) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Coarse Particle Mass (CM) Component Concentrations (to p right), Daily Average Sea Salt Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Soil Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For January 29, 2002D-29 Figure D-27: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Total Fine Particulate Matter (PM25) Concentration Spatial Plots For January 29, 2002D-30 D.10 February 1, 2002

Date Julian Day Type Class I Areas Affected

02/01/02 32 W20%

02/01/02 32 B20% GRSM, SIPS, SAMA, BRET, EVER, COHU, MACA, MING, BRIG

Figure D-28: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Sulfate (SO4) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Nitrate (NO3) Component Concentrations (top right), Daily Average Ammonium (NH4) Component Concentr:ations, And Daily Average Organic Carbon (OC) Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For February 1, 2002D-31 Figure D-29: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Elemental Carbon (EC) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Coarse Particle Mass (CM) Component Concentrations (to p right), Daily Average Sea Salt Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Soil Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For February 1, 2002D-32 Figure D-30: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Total Fine Particulate Matter (PM25) Concentration Spatial Plots For February 1, 2002D-33 D.11 February 4, 2002

Date Julian Day Type Class I Areas Affected

02/04/02 35 W20% SAMA, EVER

02/04/02 35 B20% JARI, MACA

Figure D-31: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Sulfate (SO4) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Nitrate (NO3) Component Concentrations (top right), Daily Average Ammonium (NH4) Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Organic Carbon (OC) Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For February 4, 2002D-34 Figure D-32: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Elemental Carbon (EC) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Coarse Particle Mass (CM) Component Concentrations (to p right), Daily Average Sea Salt Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Soil Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For February 4, 2002D-35 Figure D-33: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Total Fine Particulate Matter (PM25) Concentration Spatial Plots For February 4, 2002D-36 D.12 February 7, 2002

Date Julian Day Type Class I Areas Affected

02/07/02 38 W20%

02/07/02 38 B20% LIGO, SHRO, GRSM, SAMA, OKEF, BRET, SHEN, CHAS, COHU

Figure D-34: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Sulfate (SO4) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Nitrate (NO3) Component Concentrations (top right), Daily Average Ammonium (NH4) Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Organic Carbon (OC) Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For February 7, 2002D-37 Figure D-35: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Elemental Carbon (EC) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Coarse Particle Mass (CM) Component Concentrations (to p right), Daily Average Sea Salt Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Soil Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For February 7, 2002D-38 Figure D-36: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Total Fine Particulate Matter (PM25) Concentration Spatial Plots For February 7, 2002D-39 D.13 February 10, 2002

Date Julian Day Type Class I Areas Affected

02/10/02 41 W20% CHAS

02/10/02 41 B20%

Figure D-37: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Sulfate (SO4) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Nitrate (NO3) Component Concentrations (top right), Daily Average Ammonium (NH4) Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Organic Carbon (OC) Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For February 10, 2002D-40 Figure D-38: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Elemental Carbon (EC) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Coarse Particle Mass (CM) Component Concentrations (to p right), Daily Average Sea Salt Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Soil Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For February 10, 2002D-41 Figure D-39: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Total Fine Particulate Matter (PM25) Concentration Spatial Plots For February 10, 2002D-42 D.14 February 13, 2002

Date Julian Day Type Class I Areas Affected

02/13/02 44 W20% SAMA, OKEF, BRET, CHAS, EVER, ROMA

02/13/02 44 B20% JARI, HEGL, COHU, MACA, MING

Figure D-40: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Sulfate (SO4) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Nitrate (NO3) Component Concentrations (top right), Daily Average Ammonium (NH4) Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Organic Carbon (OC) Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For February 13, 2002D-43 Figure D-41: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Elemental Carbon (EC) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Coarse Particle Mass (CM) Component Concentrations (to p right), Daily Average Sea Salt Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Soil Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For February 13, 2002D-44 Figure D-42: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Total Fine Particulate Matter (PM25) Concentration Spatial Plots For February 13, 2002D-45 D.15 February 16, 2002

Date Julian Day Type Class I Areas Affected

02/16/02 47 W20% SAMA, BRET, CHAS, ROMA

02/16/02 47 B20% UPBU

Figure D-43: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Sulfate (SO4) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Nitrate (NO3) Component Concentrations (top right), Daily Average Ammonium (NH4) Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Organic Carbon (OC) Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For February 16, 2002D-46 Figure D-44: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Elemental Carbon (EC) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Coarse Particle Mass (CM) Component Concentrations (to p right), Daily Average Sea Salt Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Soil Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For February 16, 2002D-47 Figure D-45: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Total Fine Particulate Matter (PM25) Concentration Spatial Plots For February 16, 2002D-48 D.16 February 19, 2002

Date Julian Day Type Class I Areas Affected

02/19/02 50 W20%

02/19/02 50 B20% SHRO, GRSM, SHEN, DOSO

Figure D-46: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Sulfate (SO4) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Nitrate (NO3) Component Concentrations (top right), Daily Average Ammonium (NH4) Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Organic Carbon (OC) Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For February 19, 2002D-49 Figure D-47: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Elemental Carbon (EC) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Coarse Particle Mass (CM) Component Concentrations (to p right), Daily Average Sea Salt Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Soil Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For February 19, 2002D-50 Figure D-48: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Total Fine Particulate Matter (PM25) Concentration Spatial Plots For February 19, 2002D-51 D.17 February 22, 2002

Date Julian Day Type Class I Areas Affected

02/22/02 53 W20% SWAN, ROMA

02/22/02 53 B20%

Figure D-49: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Sulfate (SO4) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Nitrate (NO3) Component Concentrations (top right), Daily Average Ammonium (NH4) Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Organic Carbon (OC) Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For February 22, 2002D-52 Figure D-50: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Elemental Carbon (EC) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Coarse Particle Mass (CM) Component Concentrations (to p right), Daily Average Sea Salt Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Soil Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For February 22, 2002D-53 Figure D-51: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Total Fine Particulate Matter (PM25) Concentration Spatial Plots For February 22, 2002D-54 D.18 February 25, 2002

Date Julian Day Type Class I Areas Affected

02/25/02 56 W20% GRSM, SAMA, OKEF, CHAS, EVER, SWAN,

COHU

02/25/02 56 B20%

Figure D-52: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Sulfate (SO4) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Nitrate (NO3) Component Concentrations (top right), Daily Average Ammonium (NH4) Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Organic Carbon (OC) Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For February 25, 2002D-55 Figure D-53: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Elemental Carbon (EC) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Coarse Particle Mass (CM) Component Concentrations (to p right), Daily Average Sea Salt Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Soil Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For February 25, 2002D-56 Figure D-54: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Total Fine Particulate Matter (PM25) Concentration Spatial Plots For February 25, 2002D-57 D.19 February 28, 2002

Date Julian Day Type Class I Areas Affected

02/28/02 59 W20% SHEN

02/28/02 59 B20% GRSM, JARI, SIPS, OKEF

Figure D-55: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Sulfate (SO4) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Nitrate (NO3) Component Concentrations (top right), Daily Average Ammonium (NH4) Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Organic Carbon (OC) Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For February 28, 2002D-58 Figure D-56: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Elemental Carbon (EC) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Coarse Particle Mass (CM) Component Concentrations (to p right), Daily Average Sea Salt Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Soil Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For February 28, 2002D-59 Figure D-57: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Total Fine Particulate Matter (PM25) Concentration Spatial Plots For February 28, 2002D-60 D.20 March 3, 2002

Date Julian Day Type Class I Areas Affected

03/03/02 62 W20% EVER

03/03/02 62 B20% LIGO, GRSM, OKEF, SHEN, COHU, MACA, ROMA, MING

Figure D-58: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Sulfate (SO4) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Nitrate (NO3) Component Concentrations (top right), Daily Average Ammonium (NH4) Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Organic Carbon (OC) Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For March 3, 2002D-61 Figure D-59: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Elemental Carbon (EC) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Coarse Particle Mass (CM) Component Concentrations (to p right), Daily Average Sea Salt Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Soil Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For March 3, 2002D-62 Figure D-60: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Total Fine Particulate Matter (PM25) Concentration Spatial Plots For March 3, 2002D-63 D.21 March 6, 2002

Date Julian Day Type Class I Areas Affected

03/06/02 65 W20%

03/06/02 65 B20% ROMA

Figure D-61: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Sulfate (SO4) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Nitrate (NO3) Component Concentrations (top right), Daily Average Ammonium (NH4) Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Organic Carbon (OC) Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For March 6, 2002D-64 Figure D-62: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Elemental Carbon (EC) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Coarse Particle Mass (CM) Component Concentrations (to p right), Daily Average Sea Salt Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Soil Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For March 6, 2002D-65 Figure D-63: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Total Fine Particulate Matter (PM25) Concentration Spatial Plots For March 6, 2002D-66 D.22 March 9, 2002

Date Julian Day Type Class I Areas Affected

03/09/02 68 W20%

03/09/02 68 B20% SHRO, GRSM, JARI, SAMA, BRET, SHEN, DOSO, CHAS, SWAN, HEGL, MACA, ROMA, UPBU, BRIG

Figure D-64: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Sulfate (SO4) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Nitrate (NO3) Component Concentrations (top right), Daily Average Ammonium (NH4) ComponentD-67 Concentrations, And Daily Average Organic Carbon (OC) Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For March 9, 2002

Figure D-65: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Elemental Carbon (EC) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Coarse Particle Mass (CM) Component Concentrations (to p right), Daily Average Sea Salt Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Soil Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For March 9, 2002D-68 Figure D-66: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Sulfate (SO4) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Nitrate (NO3) Component Concentrations (top right), Daily Average Ammonium (NH4) Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Organic Carbon (OC) Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For March 12, 2002D-69 Figure D-67: Modeled Predicted And Observed Daily Average Elemental Carbon (EC) Component Concentrations (top left), Daily Average Coarse Particle Mass (CM) Component Concentrations (to p right), Daily Average Sea Salt Component Concentrations, And Daily Average Soil Component Concentrations Spatial Plots For March 12, 2002