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 

981

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 981

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 

' 100 
Table 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 ------- ---- -----
Table 3: 

Data Input for BART Baseline, EPA BART and Tesoro "Better-Than-BART" Scenarios 

Tesoro BART Modeling Analysis: April 2013 

Case #1 : Baseline 

31 

31 

31 31 31 30 31 

Case #2 : EPA BART 

31 

104.90 

83.30 

102.70 

33.70 37.80 

142.20 

159.20 

104.90 

SOX{Z) 

3700 3700 3700 3600 

3700 3700 3600 

3700 

3.700 

32.47 

25.77 

31.8 

11.24 11.69 

44.03 48.36 

32.47 

]5.77 

87.28 

69.27 

85.48 

30.22 

31.42 

122.31 

130.00 

Nov·04 30 76970.00 

Nov-04 30 86421.00 

Apr-06 30 90559.00 

Feb-05 28 27878.00 

Jan-06 31 30653.00 

Oct-06 31 103948.00 

Seo-06 30 114465.00 

Release (for NOX/PM calcs) 

30 30 

76970 

86421 

106.9 120.0 125.8 

41.5 41.2 

139.7 

159.0 

3.2 3.0 

16.5 3.0 

13.7 3.0 

1.2 3.0 

4.1 3.0 

39.0 3.0 

45.8 3.0 
45468 61 .1 

39014 52.4 

7693 10.3 

3700 32.47 87.28 Nov-04 30 76970 106.9 3.2 3.0 

3700 25.77 69.27 Nov-04 30 86421 120.0 16.5 3.0 

3700 31.8 85.48 Apr-06 30 90559 125.8 13.7 3.0 

3600 11.24 30.22 Feb-05 28 27878 41.5 1.2 3.0 

3700 11.69 31.42 Jan-06 31 30653 41.2 4.1 3.0 

3700 44.03 3600 48.36 

13 @ 72% reduction in NOX; F-304 @ 39% reduction in NOX. 

330.7 

Case #3: Tesoro Better-Than-BART 866.81 

NOX 

1000 1.76 1.7 Oct-04 31 6928 9.3 9.2 72.5 0.9 3 1000 19.35 13.2 Oct-06 31 45468 61.1 62.2 74.7 6.2 3 

1000 13.776 9.4 May-06 31 39014 52.4 50.8 74.7 5.1 3 

1000 4.39 4.2 Jan-04 31 13801 18.5 18.6 73.1 1.8 3 

1000 36.38 33.4 May-06 31 113050 151.9 147.2 209.1 41.4 3 

1000 29.13 21.4 Apr-06 30 81655 113.4 107.3 208.9 31.1 3 

1000 17.63 13.6 Apr-06 30 48171 66.9 63.3 74.7 6.6 3 

1000 8.48 6.5 May-04 31 25019 33.6 34.7 74.6 3.5 3 

1000 8.03 5.9 Sep-06 30 21536 29.9 28.3 74.7 2.9 3 

8.1 1000 2.69 1.8 Mar-06 31 7693 10.3 10.7 74.5 1.1 3 

31 104.90 1000 8.86 23.8 Nov-04 30 76970.00 106.9 3.2 3.0 

31 83.30 1000 7.03 18.9 Nov-04 30 86421.00 120.0 16.5 3.0 

31 102.70 1000 8.67 2B Apr-06 30 90559.00 125.8 13.7 3.0 

31 33.70 1000 2.85 7.6 Feb-05 28 27878.00 41.5 1.2 3.0 

31 37.80 1000 3.19 8.6 Jan-06 31 30653.00 41 .2 4.1 3.0 

30 142.20 1000 12.01 33.4 Oct-06 31 103948.00 139.7 39.0 3.0 

31 159.20 1000 13.44 36.1 Seo-06 30 114465.00 159.0 45.8 3.0 

>>>>> 322.76 484.7