### April11,2013

Mr. Dennis McLerran Regional Administrator
EPA Region 10
1200 Sixth Ave., Ste. 900 Seattle, W A 981 01 

# RECB'JB>

APR 15 

## 2013
Office 

# Of The 

# fxgoutfve

# ~ TESORO

Tesoro Refining and Marketing Company 10200 West March Point Road P.O. Box 700 Anacortes, WA 98221 360 293 9102 360 293 9190 Fax



### Re: Tesoro Anacortes Refinery CALPUFF Modeling Results for BART Baseline, EPA
BART and Tesoro "Better- Than-BART" Scenarios

Dear Mr. McLerran:

Tesoro Refining & 

### Marketing Company LLC, Anacortes Refinery ("Tesoro") is hereby submitting CALPUFF dispersion modeling results for the BART Baseline, EPA BART, and

Tesoro "Better- Than-BART" modeling scenarios in response to public comment received by
EPA concerning the proposed "Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of Washington; Regional Haze State Implementation Plan; Federal Implementation Plan for Best
Available Retrofit Technology for Alcoa Intalco Operations and Tesoro Refining and Marketing". 77 Fed. Reg. 76,174 (Dec. 26, 2012)

The results ofthe modeling demonstrate that the Tesoro "Better-Than-BART" scenario clearly yields greater visibility improvement for all Class 1 areas within 300 

### km of Tesoro as compared

to the EPA BART Scenario. Specifically, in these areas of interest the overall mean number of days exceeding 0.5 deciviews (dv) is reduced by about 52 percent and 63 percent in the EPA
BART and Better-Than-BART case simulations, respectively. Additionally, the overall mean 98 1 h 

### percentile for the change in the daily haze index for areas of interest under the EPA BART

case is about 68 percent of the prediction for the BART Baseline scenario. The Better- ThanBART case results improve on the BART case and the mean 98 1 h 

### percentile change in the daily
haze index to about 60 percent of the prediction for the BART Baseline scenario. This
conclusion is consistent with, and further supports, the statements provided by EPA in the proposed implementation plan presented on Dec. 26, 2012.

The modeling was conducted by ENVIRON in accordance with the protocol approved by EPA

on March 28, 2013 (Appendix 1). The modeling report is provided in Appendix 2.

### Please contact Rebecca Spurling at (360) 293-1664 if you have further questions.

Sincerely,

Manager- Health, Safety and Environment

# Appendix 1:

BART Modeling Protocol (3-28-2013)



### Apply "Modeling Protocol for Washington, Oregon and Idaho: Protocol for the Application of
the CALPUFF Modeling System Pursuant to the Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Regulation (7/21/06)."

The CALPUFF modeling system will 

### be applied using the exact same meteorological data set (2003-2005), model versions, and options as specified in the original Protocol used in the February 2008 "BART Determination Modeling Analysis, Tesoro Anacortes Refinery." The following results will be summarized for each Class 1 area within 300 km 

### radius of Tesoro:

1. Contrasting the number of days with predicted changes to the haze index greater than

0.5 dv

2. The 

### ggth percentile change to the daily haze index

3. The maximum change to the daily haze index.



### The design day extinction budgets will also be presented for each Class I area, emission case, and year.

Model the following cases:

1. Baseline 2. EPABART 3. Tesoro's "Better-than-BART" Proposal

Baseline:

• Include all sources involved in the EPA BART and Tesoro "Better-than-BART" cases as listed

in Attachment 

### 1.

• Apply estimated maximum 24-hour emission rates during 2004-2006 for each pollutant for

all EPA BART and Tesoro "Better-than-BART" sources. 

### (*)

• Apply meteorological (met) conditions previously prepared during initial BART modeling (2003-2005).

• Post-control for 502 and PM emission rates will be used for F-302 and F-304 to account for

the installation of the Flue Gas Scrubber at the CCU in 2005. This will remain constant for all

three cases.

### EPA BART:

Using the "Baseline" furnace firing rate, apply the emission reduction benefit of:

1. 

### BART controls (as agreed to in Ecology's BART Order #7838) 2. EPA additional BART NOX controls at the following sources: F-6650, F-6651, F-6652, F-6654 and F-304.



### Tesoro "Better- Than-BART":

Using the "Baseline" furnace firing rate, apply the emission reduction benefit of:



### 1. BART controls (as agreed to in Ecology's BART Order #7838) 2. Tesoro RFG Project to non-BART sources: F-101, F-102, F-301, F-6652, F-751, F-752.

### Attachment 1 :

BART Modeling Protocol to Compare EPA BART vs. Tesoro "Better-Than-BART" proposal

BASELINE EPA Tesoro BART Better- Than-BART
SOX, NOX, 

### PMlO SOX, NOX, 

### PMlO SOX, NOX, 

### PMlO

Estimated 24-hour max Emissions estimated using same Emissions estimated using same emission rate, unless o/w furnace firing rate as Baseline. furnace firing rate as Baseline. specified.
PM

- same as baseline unless o/w PM

- same as baseline unless o/w specified specified 

### EPA BART SOURCES

F-103 X SOX/PM: No oil Burning SOX/PM: No oil Burning NOX: 59.1 tpy (post contollimit) NOX: 59.1 tpy (post contollimit) SOX: 1000 ppm RFG H2S SOX: 1000 ppm RFG H2S S
F-104 X SOX: 1000 ppm RFG H2S SOX: 1000 ppm RFG H2S
F-654 X SOX: 1000 ppm RFG H2S SOX: 1000 ppm RFG H2S
F-6600 X SOX: 1000 ppm RFG H2S SOX: 1000 ppm RFG H2S F-6601 X SOX: 1000 ppm RI'G H2S SOX: 1000 ppm RFG H2S
F-6602 X SOX: 1000 ppm RFG H2S SOX: 1000 ppm RFG H2S
F-6650 & 51 (CR) X NOX: 72% reduction in baseline NOX: equal to baseline

SOX: 1000 ppm RFG H2S SOX: 1000 ppm RFG H2S
F-6652&53 (CR) X NOX: 72% reduction in baseline NOX: equal to baseline SOX: 1000 ppm RFG H2S SOX: 1000 ppm RFG H2S
F-6654 X SOX: 1000 ppm RfG H2S SOX: 1000 ppm RFG H2S
F-6655 X SOX: 1000 ppm RFG H2S SOX: 1000 ppm RFG H2S
F-304 (via CCU Flue NOX: 58% of the actual fGS NOX: 39% reduction in baseline NOX: equal to baseline
Gas Scrubber Stack: NOX Emissions (I) V-348) SOX/PM: 50% post-FGS control SOX/PM: 50% post-FGS control SOX/PM: 50% post-FGS control
Hare X-819 X Equal to baseline Equal to baseline

Cooling Water #2 X Equal to baseline Equal to baseline Cooling Water #2A X Equal to baseline Equal to baseline



### Tesoro Better-Than-BART Sources

F-101 X SOX: equal to baseline SOX: 1000 ppm RFG H2S
F-102 X SOX: equal to baseline SOX: 1000 ppm RFG H2S
F-201 X SOX: equal to baseline SOX: 1000 ppm RFG H2S
F-301 X SOX: equal to baseline SOX: 1000 ppm RFG H2S
F-652 X SOX: equal to baseline SOX: 1000 ppm RFG H2S
F-751 X SOX: equal to baseline SOX: 1000 ppm RFG H2S
F-752 X SOX: equal to baseline SOX: 1000 ppm RFG H2S (I) F-302 and F-304 share a common stack. F-304 contnbutes- 58% of the total FGS NOX and 50% of the total FGS SOX and PM. (2) For the purpose of comparing EPA BART and Tesoro Better-than-BART, the baseline 24-hour maximum emission rate is being estimated using the maximum monthly emission rate between 2004-2006. Furthermore for the non-BART sources F-751 and F-752, the maximum monthly period was selected from months whereby only RFG was burned (no oil burning). (3)Tesoro is subject to a federally enforceable RFG H2S limit of I ,000 ppm, 365-day rolling average, applied in the Ecology BART Order #7838. (4) The original BART Modeling 24-hour emission rates for the Hare X-819, Cooling Water #2, Cooling Water #2A will be applied to all three modeling cases due to the relatively low emission rates and that there are no proposed emissions changes in either the EPA BART or Tesoro Better-Than-BART scenarios.

# Appendix 2:

CALPUFF Modeling results for BART Baseline, EPA BART and

Tesoro "Better- Than-BART" Scenarios



### ENVIRON applied the CALPUFF modeling system to assess regional haze in Class I areas potentially caused by the S02, NOx, and PMIO emissions in the Baseline, BART, and Betterthan-BART cases. The modeling domain and Class I areas considered in the analysis are depicted in Figure 1. The simulations were performed following the original 2008 Tesoro BART

Determination Modeling Analysis 1 

### using the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, and Washington State Department of Ecology

BART Modeling Protocol. 2 

### The simulations were performed using the same 2003-2005 meteorological database as in the 2008 Tesoro BART Determination Modeling Analysis and as
in related analyses from other BART sources in the three states.

ENVIRON post-processed the CALPUFF output files to calculate the change to the Haze Index
(HI) predicted by aerosols emitted and formed from the Tesoro units for each emission case. Background His for each Class I area were calculated using the extinction methods, visibility
metrics, monthly average relative humidity adjustment factors, and aerosol concentrations listed

in the BART Modeling Protocol.



### As recommended by the BART Modeling Protocol, 

### ENVIRON used the 98th percentile change to

the daily Haze Index**(~HI),** 

### in units of deciviews ( dv), as a visibility metric to assess the significance of results from the three emission cases. The 98th percentiles within each Class I

area were estimated from the 22nd highest prediction in three-years. ENVIRON also summarized

the simulations by comparing the number of days where the predicted**~H** 

### exceeds 0.5 dv within

each Class I area. This is the screening criterion for BART exemption.**~HI's** 

### ofless than 0.5 dv

when compared to "natural" conditions do not cause or contribute to impairment of visibility.

1 Geomatrix, 2008. BART Determination Modeling Analysis, Tesoro Anacortes Refinery, Anacortes, Washington. Prepared for: Tesoro Refining and Marketing Company, 10200 West March's Point Road, Anacortes, WA 98221, February 2008, Project 13076.000.0, February 2008.

2 Modeling Protocol for Washington, Oregon, and Idaho: Protocol for the Application of the CALPUFF Modeling System Pursuant to the Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Regulation. Final Version October 11, 2006.

### Table 1 displays the number of days in three years predicted by the CALPUFF modeling system

where the L1HI significance criterion of 0.5 dv was exceeded for each area of interest and

emission case. The number of days in three years exceeding the screening criterion range in the

Baseline case from 128 days in North Cascades National Park to one day in the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area (CRGNSA). In areas of interest, the overall mean number of days exceeding 0.5 dv is reduced by about 52 percent and 63 percent in the BART and Better- ThanBART case simulations, respectively.

Table 2 presents the three-year 98th percentile L1HI predicted for each Class I area and emission

case. This metric is related both to the frequency and magnitude of the predicted change to the

haze index. The overall mean 98th percentile L1HI for areas of interest under the BART case is

about 68 percent of the prediction for the Baseline scenario. The Better- Than-BART case results improve on the BART case and the mean 98th percentile L1HI for all areas of interest is about 60

percent of the prediction for the Baseline scenario.

Figure 2, Figure 3, and Figure 4 show the maximum 24-hour extinction coefficients predicted for

the Baseline, BART, and Better-Than-BART cases, respectively. 3 

### The highest predictions for all

cases are associated with stagnation conditions and are generally confined to lowland areas. For

any given contour of 24-hour maximum extinction, the areas potentially affected are significantly reduced from the Baseline to the BART case and further from the BART to the

Better- Than- BART case.

The results ofthe CALPUFF regional haze modeling analysis predict the Better-Than-BART

case further improves the benefits to regional haze ofthe BART case. The Better-Than-BART improvements in regional haze are predicted for each Class I areas considered in the simulations

based on visibility metrics calculated from the three years of meteorological data.

3 The figures were prepared from the highest 24-hour predictions excluding background, using the monthly relative humidity correction factors for the Olympic National Park.

### TABLE 1

Number of with Predicted change to the haze index Greater than 0.5 Deciviews

Number of Days in Three Years with Delta HI 

### > 0.5 dv

Meteor. Better- ThanArea of Interest Period Baseline BART BART

Alpine Lakes Wildemess 2003-2005 94 39 28

Glacier Peak Wildemess 2003-2005 111 48 33

Goat Rocks Wilderness 2003-2005 10 4 2

Mt. Adams Wildemess 2003-2005 9 4 1

Mt. Rainier National Park 2003-2005 44 21 8

N. Cascades National Park 2003-2005 128 58 47

Olympic National Park 2003-2005 116 78 73

Pasayten Wildemess 2003-2005 31 9 2

CRGNSA 2003-2005 1 0 0

Min 1 0 0

Mean 60 29 22
Overall
Max 128 78 73

Total Days 544 261 166

### TABLE2

Three-Year Predicted 98th Percentile Change to the Daily Haze Index

98th Percentile Delta HI (dv) 1



### Meteor. Better- ThanArea of Interest Period Baseline BART BART

Alpine Lakes Wilderness 2003-2005 0.932 0.639 0.558

Glacier Peak Wilderness 2003-2005 0.963 0.649 0.566

Goat Rocks Wilderness 2003-2005 0.317 0.212 0.172

Mt. Adams Wildemess 2003-2005 0.277 0.186 0.146

Mt. Rainier National Park 2003-2005 0.737 0.498 0.394

N. Cascades National Park 2003-2005 1.035 0.707 0.666

Olympic National Park 2003-2005 1.736 1.212 1.106

Pasayten Wildemess 2003-2005 0.575 0.387 0.332

CRGNSA 2003-2005 0.141 0.096 0.081

Min 0.141 0.096 0.081

Overaii Mean 0.746 0.510 0.447

Max 1.736 1.212 1.106

1. Based on the 22"d highest in three years within a Class I area-350 -300 -250 -200 -150 -100 -50

East- West LCC (km)


### Figure 1. CALPUFF Modeling Domain with Class I Receptors Tesoro Refinery BART Determination Modeling Anacortes, Washington Domain 0 50 100

## o-1

j

# -50~

!



## I
-100:,
!

# ~ I**-200~**

i

-250 I

-350-1' 

## I'

I

-350 -300 -250 -200 -150 -100 -50

East- West LCC (km)


### Figure 2. Tesoro Anacortes Baseline Case Maximum Extinction (1/Mm) Excluding Background Meteorological Period: 2003-2005 I

I

0 50 100

# 100~
I

-100 

# !

u 

### ::l**~** -150-j

0 I 

### "' ' i
I. I -200-i

I

-250

-300

-350

-400

' -350 /\/

-300 -250 -200 -150 -100 -50

East- West LCC (km)


### Figure 3. Tesoro Anacortes BART Case Maximum Extinction (1/Mm) Excluding Background Meteorological Period: 2003-2005 ' 0 50**~** i

I r

______ __j

100-50

-100 

# !

u :::l
.,s -150**~**

I

# ~::I

-3001

I

-350-1

!

-400-i

-350 .. -· /

.....

-300 ----T I -250 -200 -150 -100 -50

East- West LCC (km)


### Figure 4. Tesoro Anacortes Better-Than-BART Case Maximum Extinction (1/Mm) Excluding Background Meteorological Period: 2003-2005 0 0 "\}'

50 L

' 100Table 4: Data Input Table for BART Baseline, EPA BART and Tesoro BetterThan-BART Sources Stack Stack Stack Stack RFG ACFS ACFS ACFS HT Dl Temp 02 SG S02 NO X/PM Avg ft ft Deg F % (1) F103 (Total) 151.0 6.5 569 6.4 0.46 764.0 908.8 836.4 F104 150.0 3.0 538 5.5 0.46 202.1 236.2 219.1 F654 130.0 3.0 466 6.2 0.46 61.0 75.8 68.4 F6600 150.0 5.0 400 6.2 0.46 584.9 626.2 605.5 F6601 150.0 3.1 505 6.8 0.46 360.3 443.2 401.8 F6602 157.0 2.6 303 5.8 0.46 121.3 121.3 121.3 F6650 150.0 7.0 346 7.0 0.46 1355.5 1355.5 1,355.5 F6651 150.0 7.0 346 7.0 0.46 867.4 989.0 928.2 F6652 150.0 7.0 346 7.5 0.46 535.3 584.2 559.7 F6653 150.0 7.0 346 7.6 0.46 259.0 322.1 290.5 F6654 150.0 2.6 527 6.0 0.46 221.4 241.9 231.6 F6655 90.0 4.5 493 10.0 0.46 124.0 163.4 143.7

F304 199.0 11.5 155 0.46 4140.0 4140.0 4,140.0 Flare X819 40.0 15.0 1200 0.46 423.0 423.0 423.0 CW#2 49.6 36.0 100 0.46 28800.0 28800.0 28,800.0 CW#2A 41.8 31.1 100 0.46 17300.0 17300.0 17,300.0 F101 97 5.75 627 5.0 0.46 905.5 795.0 850.3 F102 120 5.75 742 4.1 0.46 761.8 1103.8 932.8 F201 120 5.47 427 2.6 0.46 635.8 736.8 686.3 F301 97 5.75 295 9.8 0.46 284.4 265.8 275.1 F652 70.3 4.50 511 7.9 0.46 314.5 342.8 328.6 F751 125 6.00 374 4.0 0.46 938.4 938.4 938.4 F752 126 6.00 364 3.6 0.46 958.7 958.7 958.7 ------- ---- -----Table3:DataInputforBARTBaseline,EPABARTandTesoro"Better-Than-BART"ScenariosTesoroBARTModelingAnalysis:April2013Case#1:Baseline31313131313031Case#2:EPABART31104.9083.30102.7033.7037.80142.20159.20104.90SOX{Z)370037003700360037003700360037003.70032.4725.7731.811.2411.6944.0348.3632.47]5.7787.2869.2785.4830.2231.42122.31130.00Nov·043076970.00Nov-043086421.00Apr-063090559.00Feb-052827878.00Jan-063130653.00Oct-0631103948.00Seo-0630114465.00Release(forNOX/PMcalcs)30307697086421106.9120.0125.841.541.2139.7159.03.23.016.53.013.73.01.23.04.13.039.03.045.83.0276.3362.1357.094.5123.6426.6477.63.03.085.227.6186.6152.455.8441.6321.9189.9104.184.932.1276.3362.14546861.13901452.4769310.3370032.4787.28Nov-043076970106.93.23.0276.3370025.7769.27Nov-043086421120.016.53.0362.1370031.885.48Apr-063090559125.813.73.0357.0360011.2430.22Feb-05282787841.51.23.094.5370011.6931.42Jan-06313065341.24.13.0370044.03360048.3613@72%reductioninNOX;F-304@39%reductioninNOX.330.7Case#3:TesoroBetter-Than-BART866.81NOX10001.761.7Oct-043169289.39.272.50.9327.6100019.3513.2Oct-06314546861.162.274.76.23186.6100013.7769.4May-06313901452.450.874.75.13152.410004.394.2Jan-04311380118.518.673.11.8355.8100036.3833.4May-0631113050151.9147.2209.141.43441.6100029.1321.4Apr-063081655113.4107.3208.931.13321.9100017.6313.6Apr-06304817166.9 63.374.76.63189.910008.486.5May-04312501933.634.774.63.53104.110008.035.9Sep-06302153629.928.374.72.9384.98.110002.691.8Mar-0631769310.310.774.51.1332.131104.9010008.8623.8Nov-043076970.00106.93.23.0276.33183.3010007.0318.9Nov-043086421.00120.016.53.0362.131102.7010008.672BApr-063090559.00125.813.73.0357.03133.7010002.857.6Feb-052827878.0041.51.23.094.53137.8010003.198.6Jan-063130653.0041.24.13.0123.630142.20100012.0133.4Oct-0631103948.00139.739.03.0426.631159.20100013.4436.1Seo-0630114465.00159.045.83.0477.6TotaLbs/Hr>>>>>322.76484.720.3807