SO2 NOx PM Fine PM Coarse3

SO2 NOx PM

98th Percentile 

Impact (dv)

98th Percentile 

Improvement (dv)

Class I 

Area

Meterological 

Year

Modeling performed by Basin Electric1

Precontrol 5970.0 813.0 16.5 138.7 No control Existing LNB Existing ESP 2.539 NA TRNP-SU 2002

Run 1 905.0 760.4 23.1 194.0 FGD at 90% Presumptive Existing ESP 0.832 1.707 TRNP-SU 2002

Run 2 633.5 760.4 23.1 194.0 FGD at 93% Presumptive Existing ESP 0.796 1.743 TRNP-SU 2002

Run 3 452.5 760.4 23.1 194.0 FGD at 95% Presumptive Existing ESP 0.627 1.912 TRNP-SU 2002

Run 4 905.0 603.0 23.1 194.0 FGD at 90% SOFA Existing ESP 0.703 1.836 TRNP-SU 2002

Run 5 633.5 603.0 23.1 194.0 FGD at 93% SOFA Existing ESP 0.662 1.877 TRNP-SU 2002

Run 6 452.5 603.0 23.1 194.0 FGD at 95% SOFA Existing ESP 0.524 2.015 TRNP-SU 2002

Supplemental4

452.5 441.0 23.1 194.0 FGD at 95% SOFA+SNCR Existing ESP 1.610 NA TRNP-SU 2002

1

See Appendix C.4 of SIP.

4

Represents the modeled impact from Units 1 and 2 combined. Individual unit impacts for the SOFA+SNCR control option were not supplied by NDDH.

Scenario

3

Emission rates reflecting PM control options were not modeled. Instead, the PM emission rate reflects control with the existing ESP. 

Leland Olds Unit 1 CALPUFF Modeling

Emission Rate (lbs/hr)2Control Option

2

The precontrol emission rate reflects actual operation from the highest emitting day of the years 2000-2002 (meteorological period modeled per the NDDH BART protocol). By contrast, the 

control scenario emission rates assume operation at the boiler potential-to-emit heat input capacity of 2622 lb/MMBtu. In addition, the SO2 precontrol emission rate is based on a fuel sulfur 

content of 2.76 lb/MMBtu, while the SO2 control scenario emission rates are based on an assumed fuel sulfur content of 3.43 lb/MMBtu.

7/14/2011
SO2 NOx PM Fine PM Coarse3

SO2 NOx PM

98th Percentile 

Impact (dv)

98th Percentile 

Improvement (dv)

Class I 

Area

Meterological 

Year

Modeling performed by Basin Electric1,4

Precontrol 12205.0 3959.0 26.9 226.3 No control No control Existing ESP 4.924 NA TRNP-SU 2002

Run 1 885.3 1359.5 45.6 383.0 FGD at 95% ASOFA+RRI+SNCR Existing ESP 0.961 3.963 TRNP-SU 2002

Run 2 885.3 1559.5 45.6 383.0 FGD at 95% ASOFA+SNCR Existing ESP 1.050 3.874 TRNP-SU 2002

Run 3 885.3 2462.0 45.6 383.0 FGD at 95% ASOFA Existing ESP 1.445 3.479 TRNP-SU 2002

Modeling performed by ND Dept. of Health2,5

ND Run 1 880.5 395.9 45.6 383.0 FGD at 95% ASOFA+SCR Existing ESP 0.531 4.393 TRNP-SU 2002

1

See Appendix C.4 of SIP.

2

See Appendix B.4 of SIP.

5

NDDH applied the assumed percent NOx reduction for the control scenario to the precontrol emission rate.

4

The precontrol emission rate reflects actual operation from the highest emitting day of the years 2000-2002 (meteorological period modeled per the NDDH BART protocol). By contrast, the control scenario emission 

emission rates assume operation at the boiler potential-to-emit heat input capacity of 5130 MMBtu/hr. In addition, the SO2 precontrol emission rate is based on a fuel sulfur content of 2.76 lb/MMBtu, while the SO2 

control scenario emission rates are based on an assumed fuel sulfur content of 3.43 lb/MMBtu.

3

Emission rates reflecting PM control options were not modeled. Instead, the PM emission rate reflects control with the existing ESP. 

Control Option

Leland Olds Unit 2 CALPUFF Modeling

Scenario

Emission Rate (lbs/hr)

7/14/2011