Appendix 10.2 

2018 Visibility Projections for CENRAP Class I Areas 

(TSD Appendix D) 
APPENDIX D 

2018 Visibility Projections for CENRAP Class I Areas Using 

2002 Typical and 2018 Base Case Base G Emission Scenario 

CMAQ Results and EPA Default Projection Method and 

Comparison with 2018 Uniform Rate of Progress (URP) Glidepaths 

Figure D-1: Caney Creek Wilderness Area (CACR), Arkansas 

Figure D-2: Upper Buffalo Wilderness Area (UPBU), Arkansas 

Figure D-3: Breton Island Wilderness Area (BRET), Louisiana 

Figure D-4: Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness Area (BOWA), Minnesota 

Figure D-5: Voyageurs National Park (VOYA), Minnesota 

Figure D-6: Hercules Glade Wilderness Area (HEGL), Missouri 

Figure D-7: Mingo Wilderness Area (MING), Missouri 

Figure D-8: Wichita Mountains Wilderness Area (WIMO), Oklahoma 

Figure D-9: Big Bend National Park (BIBE), Texas 

Figure D-10: Guadalupe Mountains National Park (GUMO), Texas
Figure D-1a. 2018 Visibility Projections and 2018 URP Glidepaths in deciview for Caney Creek (CACR), 

Arkansas and Worst 20% (W20%) days using 2002/2018 Base G CMAQ 36 km modeling results. 

Uniform Rate of Reasonable Progress Glide Path

Caney Creek Wilderness - Best 20% Days

11.24 11.24 11.24 11.24 11.24 11.24 11.24 11.24

10.35

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2020 2024 2028 2032 2036 2040 2044 2048 2052 2056 2060 2064

Year

Haziness Index (Deciviews)

Glide Path Natural Condition (Best Days) Observation Method 1 Prediction

Figure D-1b. 2018 Visibility Projections and 2018 URP Glidepaths in deciview for Caney Creek (CACR), 

Arkansas and Best 20% (B20%) days using 2002/2018 Base G CMAQ 36 km modeling results. 

Uniform Rate of Reasonable Progress Glide Path

Caney Creek Wilderness - 20% Data Days

26.36

25.38

22.91

20.45

17.99

15.52

13.06

11.58

22.48

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2020 2024 2028 2032 2036 2040 2044 2048 2052 2056 2060 2064

Year

Haziness Index (Deciviews)

Glide Path Natural Condition (Worst Days) Observation Method 1 Prediction
Worst 20% Obs (left) vs Typ02g (right) at CACR1

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

80 128 143 155 170 173 188 191 200 203 215 218 221 239 242 248 251 254 257 260 296 320 341 _ _ Avg

Julian Day in Worst 20% group

bEXT (1/Mm)

bCM

bSOIL

bEC

bOC

bNO3

bSO4

Figure D-1c. Comparison of observed (left) and 2002 Base G modeled (right) daily extinction for Caney 

Creek (CACR), Arkansas and Worst 20% (W20%) days in 2002. 

Bext Response (base18g - typ02g) at CACR1 on Worst 20% Days

-200

-150

-100

-50

0

50

80 128 143 155 170 173 188 191 200 203 215 218 221 239 242 248 251 254 257 260 296 320 341 Avg

Julian Day

Delta Bext (1/Mm)

bCM

bSOIL

bEC

bOC

bNO3

bSO4

Figure D-1d. Differences in modeled 2002 and 2018 Base G CMAQ results (2018-2002) daily extinction 

for Caney Creek (CACR), Arkansas and Worst 20% (W20%) days in 2002. 
Uniform Rate of Reasonable Progress Glide Path

Upper Buffalo Wilderness - 20% Data Days

26.27

25.29

22.84

20.39

17.94

15.49

13.04

11.57

22.52

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2020 2024 2028 2032 2036 2040 2044 2048 2052 2056 2060 2064

Year

Haziness Index (Deciviews)

Glide Path Natural Condition (Worst Days) Observation Method 1 Prediction

Figure D-2a. 2018 Visibility Projections and 2018 URP Glidepaths in deciview for Upper Buffalo (UPBU), 

Arkansas and Worst 20% (W20%) days using 2002/2018 Base G CMAQ 36 km modeling results. 
Worst 20% Obs (left) vs Typ02g (right) at UPBU1

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

128 143 158 170 173 179 191 197 203 206 215 218 221 224 239 242 248 251 254 257 269 296 320 332 _ Avg

Julian Day in Worst 20% group

bEXT (1/Mm)

bCM

bSOIL

bEC

bOC

bNO3

bSO4

Figure D-2c. Comparison of observed (left) and 2002 Base G modeled (right) daily extinction for Upper 

Buffalo (UPBU), Arkansas and Worst 20% (W20%) days in 2002. 

Bext Response (base18g - typ02g) at UPBU1 on Worst 20% Days

-200

-150

-100

-50

0

50

128 143 158 170 173 179 191 197 203 206 215 218 221 224 239 242 248 251 254 257 269 296 320 332 Avg

Julian Day

Delta Bext (1/Mm)

bCM

bSOIL

bEC

bOC

bNO3

bSO4

Figure D-2d. Differences in modeled 2002 and 2018 Base G CMAQ results (2018-2002) daily extinction 

for Upper Buffalo (UPBU), Arkansas and Worst 20% (W20%) days in 2002. 
Uniform Rate of Reasonable Progress Glide Path

Breton - 20% Data Days

25.73

24.81

22.51

20.21

17.91

15.61

13.31

11.93

22.72

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2020 2024 2028 2032 2036 2040 2044 2048 2052 2056 2060 2064

Year

Haziness Index (Deciviews)

Glide Path Natural Condition (Worst Days) Observation Method 1 Prediction

Figure D-3a. 2018 Visibility Projections and 2018 URP Glidepaths in deciview for Breton Island (BRET), 

Louisiana and Worst 20% (W20%) days using 2002/2018 Base G CMAQ 36 km modeling results. 

Uniform Rate of Reasonable Progress Glide Path

Breton - Best 20% Days

13.12 13.12 13.12 13.12 13.12 13.12 13.12 13.12

12.22

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2020 2024 2028 2032 2036 2040 2044 2048 2052 2056 2060 2064

Year

Haziness Index (Deciviews)

Glide Path Natural Condition (Best Days) Observation Method 1 Prediction

Figure D-3b. 2018 Visibility Projections and 2018 URP Glidepaths in deciview for Breton Island (BRET), 

Louisiana and Best 20% (B20%) days using 2002/2018 Base G CMAQ 36 km modeling results. 
Worst 20% Obs (left) vs Typ02g (right) at BRET1

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

44 47 74 125 143 179 194 197 200 206 215 239 248 251 254 257 260 263 272 281 284 287 305 311 _ Avg

Julian Day in Worst 20% group

bEXT (1/Mm)

bCM

bSOIL

bEC

bOC

bNO3

bSO4

Figure D-3c. Comparison of observed (left) and 2002 Base G modeled (right) daily extinction for Breton 

Island (BRET), Louisiana and Worst 20% (W20%) days in 2002. 

Bext Response (base18g - typ02g) at BRET1 on Worst 20% Days

-60

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

44 47 74 125 143 179 194 197 200 206 215 239 248 251 254 257 260 263 272 281 284 287 305 311 Avg

Julian Day

Delta Bext (1/Mm)

bCM

bSOIL

bEC

bOC

bNO3

bSO4

Figure D-3d. Differences in modeled 2002 and 2018 Base G CMAQ results (2018-2002) daily extinction 

for Breton Island (BRET), Louisiana and Worst 20% (W20%) days in 2002. 
Uniform Rate of Reasonable Progress Glide Path

Boundary Waters Canoe Area - 20% Data Days

19.58 19.05

17.72

16.39

15.06

13.73

12.41

11.61

18.30

0

5

10

15

20

25

2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2020 2024 2028 2032 2036 2040 2044 2048 2052 2056 2060 2064

Year

Haziness Index (Deciviews)

Glide Path Natural Condition (Worst Days) Observation Method 1 Prediction

Figure D-4a. 2018 Visibility Projections and 2018 URP Glidepaths in deciview for Boundary Waters 

(BOWA), Minnesota and Worst 20% (W20%) days using 2002/2018 Base G CMAQ 36 km modeling 

results. 

Uniform Rate of Reasonable Progress Glide Path

Boundary Waters Canoe Area - Best 20% Days

6.20 6.20 6.20 6.20 6.20 6.20 6.20 6.20

6.16

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2020 2024 2028 2032 2036 2040 2044 2048 2052 2056 2060 2064

Year

Haziness Index (Deciviews)

Glide Path Natural Condition (Best Days) Observation Method 1 Prediction

Figure D-4b. 2018 Visibility Projections and 2018 URP Glidepaths in deciview for Boundary Waters 

(BOWA), Minnesota and Best 20% (B20%) days using 2002/2018 Base G CMAQ 36 km modeling 

results. 
Worst 20% Obs (left) vs Typ02g (right) at BOWA1

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

11 26 146 149 161 170 176 179 188 197 200 203 242 245 251 275 299 314 332 344 347 _ _ _ _ Avg

Julian Day in Worst 20% group

bEXT (1/Mm)

bCM

bSOIL

bEC

bOC

bNO3

bSO4

Figure D-4c. Comparison of observed (left) and 2002 Base G modeled (right) daily extinction for 

Boundary Waters (BOWA), Minnesota and Worst 20% (W20%) days in 2002. 

Bext Response (base18g - typ02g) at BOWA1 on Worst 20% Days

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

11 26 146 149 161 170 176 179 188 197 200 203 242 245 251 275 299 314 332 344 347 Avg

Julian Day

Delta Bext (1/Mm)

bCM

bSOIL

bEC

bOC

bNO3

bSO4

Figure D-4d. Differences in modeled 2002 and 2018 Base G CMAQ results (2018-2002) daily extinction 

for Boundary Waters (BOWA), Minnesota and Worst 20% (W20%) days in 2002. 
Uniform Rate of Reasonable Progress Glide Path

Voyageurs NP - 20% Data Days

19.27 18.79

17.58

16.38

15.18

13.98

12.78

12.06

18.37

0

5

10

15

20

25

2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2020 2024 2028 2032 2036 2040 2044 2048 2052 2056 2060 2064

Year

Haziness Index (Deciviews)

Glide Path Natural Condition (Worst Days) Observation Method 1 Prediction

Figure D-5a. 2018 Visibility Projections and 2018 URP Glidepaths in deciview for Voyageurs (VOYA), 

Minnesota and Worst 20% (W20%) days using 2002/2018 Base G CMAQ 36 km modeling results. 

Uniform Rate of Reasonable Progress Glide Path

Voyageurs NP - Best 20% Days

7.14 7.14 7.14 7.14 7.14 7.14 7.14 7.14

7.08

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2020 2024 2028 2032 2036 2040 2044 2048 2052 2056 2060 2064

Year

Haziness Index (Deciviews)

Glide Path Natural Condition (Best Days) Observation Method 1 Prediction

Figure D-5b. 2018 Visibility Projections and 2018 URP Glidepaths in deciview for Voyageurs (VOYA), 

Minnesota and Best 20% (B20%) days using 2002/2018 Base G CMAQ 36 km modeling results. 
Worst 20% Obs (left) vs Typ02g (right) at VOYA2

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

5 11 71 86 104 131 146 152 170 179 188 197 200 221 242 245 254 260 272 284 299 332 344 347 _ Avg

Julian Day in Worst 20% group

bEXT (1/Mm)

bCM

bSOIL

bEC

bOC

bNO3

bSO4

Figure D-5c. Comparison of observed (left) and 2002 Base G modeled (right) daily extinction for 

Voyageurs (VOYA), Minnesota and Worst 20% (W20%) days in 2002. 

Bext Response (base18g - typ02g) at VOYA2 on Worst 20% Days

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

5 11 71 86 104 131 146 152 170 179 188 197 200 221 242 245 254 260 272 284 299 332 344 347 Avg

Julian Day

Delta Bext (1/Mm)

bCM

bSOIL

bEC

bOC

bNO3

bSO4

Figure D-5d. Differences in modeled 2002 and 2018 Base G CMAQ results (2018-2002) daily extinction 

for Voyageurs (VOYA), Minnesota and Worst 20% (W20%) days in 2002. 
Uniform Rate of Reasonable Progress Glide Path

Hercules-Glades Wilderness - 20% Data Days

26.75

25.72

23.14

20.57

17.99

15.42

12.84

11.30

23.06

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2020 2024 2028 2032 2036 2040 2044 2048 2052 2056 2060 2064

Year

Haziness Index (Deciviews)

Glide Path Natural Condition (Worst Days) Observation Method 1 Prediction

Figure D-6a. 2018 Visibility Projections and 2018 URP Glidepaths in deciview for Hercules-Glade 

(HEGL), Missouri and Worst 20% (W20%) days using 2002/2018 Base G CMAQ 36 km modeling results. 

Uniform Rate of Reasonable Progress Glide Path

Hercules-Glades Wilderness - Best 20% Days

12.84 12.84 12.84 12.84 12.84 12.84 12.84 12.84

11.95

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2020 2024 2028 2032 2036 2040 2044 2048 2052 2056 2060 2064

Year

Haziness Index (Deciviews)

Glide Path Natural Condition (Best Days) Observation Method 1 Prediction

Figure D-6b. 2018 Visibility Projections and 2018 URP Glidepaths in deciview for Hercules-Glade 

(HEGL), Missouri and Best 20% (B20%) days using 2002/2018 Base G CMAQ 36 km modeling results. 
Worst 20% Obs (left) vs Typ02g (right) at HEGL1

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

5 149 152 170 173 179 188 191 206 215 218 221 224 239 242 245 248 251 257 260 269 296 320 341 347 Avg

Julian Day in Worst 20% group

bEXT (1/Mm)

bCM

bSOIL

bEC

bOC

bNO3

bSO4

Figure D-6c. Comparison of observed (left) and 2002 Base G modeled (right) daily extinction for 

Hercules-Glade (HEGL), Missouri and Worst 20% (W20%) days in 2002. 

Bext Response (base18g - typ02g) at HEGL1 on Worst 20% Days

-180

-160

-140

-120

-100

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

5 149 152 170 173 179 188 191 206 215 218 221 224 239 242 245 248 251 257 260 269 296 320 341 347 Avg

Julian Day

Delta Bext (1/Mm)

bCM

bSOIL

bEC

bOC

bNO3

bSO4

Figure D-6d. Differences in modeled 2002 and 2018 Base G CMAQ results (2018-2002) daily extinction 

for Hercules-Glade (HEGL), Missouri and Worst 20% (W20%) days in 2002. 
Uniform Rate of Reasonable Progress Glide Path

Mingo - 20% Data Days

28.02

26.98

24.37

21.77

19.17

16.56

13.96

12.40

23.71

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2020 2024 2028 2032 2036 2040 2044 2048 2052 2056 2060 2064

Year

Haziness Index (Deciviews)

Glide Path Natural Condition (Worst Days) Observation Method 1 Prediction

Figure D-7a. 2018 Visibility Projections and 2018 URP Glidepaths in deciview for Mingo (MING), 

Missouri and Worst 20% (W20%) days using 2002/2018 Base G CMAQ 36 km modeling results. 

Uniform Rate of Reasonable Progress Glide Path

Mingo - Best 20% Days

13.76 13.76 13.76 13.76 13.76 13.76 13.76 13.76

12.84

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2020 2024 2028 2032 2036 2040 2044 2048 2052 2056 2060 2064

Year

Haziness Index (Deciviews)

Glide Path Natural Condition (Best Days) Observation Method 1 Prediction

Figure D-7b. 2018 Visibility Projections and 2018 URP Glidepaths in deciview for Mingo (MING), 

Missouri and Best 20% (B20%) days using 2002/2018 Base G CMAQ 36 km modeling results. 
Worst 20% Obs (left) vs Typ02g (right) at MING1

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

20 77 95 158 173 185 188 191 194 197 206 215 218 221 239 242 245 251 272 296 332 341 _ _ _ Avg

Julian Day in Worst 20% group

bEXT (1/Mm)

bCM

bSOIL

bEC

bOC

bNO3

bSO4

Figure D-7c. Comparison of observed (left) and 2002 Base G modeled (right) daily extinction for Mingo 

(MING), Missouri and Worst 20% (W20%) days in 2002.

Bext Response (base18g - typ02g) at MING1 on Worst 20% Days

-250

-200

-150

-100

-50

0

50

20 77 95 158 173 185 188 191 194 197 206 215 218 221 239 242 245 251 272 296 332 341 Avg

Julian Day

Delta Bext (1/Mm)

bCM

bSOIL

bEC

bOC

bNO3

bSO4

Figure D-7d. Differences in modeled 2002 and 2018 Base G CMAQ results (2018-2002) daily extinction 

for Mingo (MING), Missouri and Worst 20% (W20%) days in 2002. 
Uniform Rate of Reasonable Progress Glide Path

Wichita Mountains - 20% Data Days

23.81

22.72

20.01

17.30

14.58

11.87

9.16

7.53

21.47

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2020 2024 2028 2032 2036 2040 2044 2048 2052 2056 2060 2064

Year

Haziness Index (Deciviews)

Glide Path Natural Condition (Worst Days) Observation Method 1 Prediction

Figure D-8a. 2018 Visibility Projections and 2018 URP Glidepaths in deciview for Wichita Mountains 

(WIMO), Oklahoma and Worst 20% (W20%) days using 2002/2018 Base G CMAQ 36 km modeling 

results. 

Uniform Rate of Reasonable Progress Glide Path

Wichita Mountains - Best 20% Days

9.78 9.78 9.78 9.78 9.78 9.78 9.78 9.78

9.23

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2020 2024 2028 2032 2036 2040 2044 2048 2052 2056 2060 2064

Year

Haziness Index (Deciviews)

Glide Path Natural Condition (Best Days) Observation Method 1 Prediction

Figure D-8b. 2018 Visibility Projections and 2018 URP Glidepaths in deciview for Wichita Mountains 

(WIMO), Oklahoma and Best 20% (B20%) days using 2002/2018 Base G CMAQ 36 km modeling results. 
Worst 20% Obs (left) vs Typ02g (right) at WIMO1

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

29 83 95 101 110 113 125 128 131 143 170 173 176 179 218 221 224 242 245 254 260 269 272 344 _ Avg

Julian Day in Worst 20% group

bEXT (1/Mm)

bCM

bSOIL

bEC

bOC

bNO3

bSO4

Figure D-8c. Comparison of observed (left) and 2002 Base G modeled (right) daily extinction for Wichita 

Mountains (WIMO), Oklahoma and Worst 20% (W20%) days in 2002. 

Bext Response (base18g - typ02g) at WIMO1 on Worst 20% Days

-60

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

29 83 95 101 110 113 125 128 131 143 170 173 176 179 218 221 224 242 245 254 260 269 272 344 Avg

Julian Day

Delta Bext (1/Mm)

bCM

bSOIL

bEC

bOC

bNO3

bSO4

Figure D-8d. Differences in modeled 2002 and 2018 Base G CMAQ results (2018-2002) daily extinction 

for Wichita Mountains (WIMO), Oklahoma and Worst 20% (W20%) days in 2002. 
Uniform Rate of Reasonable Progress Glide Path

Big Bend NP - 20% Data Days

17.30

16.62

14.93

13.24

11.55

9.86

8.17

7.16

16.69

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2020 2024 2028 2032 2036 2040 2044 2048 2052 2056 2060 2064

Year

Haziness Index (Deciviews)

Glide Path Natural Condition (Worst Days) Observation Method 1 Prediction

Figure D-9a. 2018 Visibility Projections and 2018 URP Glidepaths in deciview for Big Bend (BIBE), 

Texas and Worst 20% (W20%) days using 2002/2018 Base G CMAQ 36 km modeling results. 

Uniform Rate of Reasonable Progress Glide Path

Big Bend NP - Best 20% Days

5.78 5.78 5.78 5.78 5.78 5.78 5.78 5.78

5.64

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2020 2024 2028 2032 2036 2040 2044 2048 2052 2056 2060 2064

Year

Haziness Index (Deciviews)

Glide Path Natural Condition (Best Days) Observation Method 1 Prediction

Figure D-9b. 2018 Visibility Projections and 2018 URP Glidepaths in deciview for Big Bend (BIBE), 

Texas and Best 20% (B20%) days using 2002/2018 Base G CMAQ 36 km modeling results. 
Worst 20% Obs (left) vs Typ02g (right) at BIBE1

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

29 71 89 92 95 101 110 113 116 119 125 128 131 143 167 191 218 221 230 242 245 254 275 329 _ Avg

Julian Day in Worst 20% group

bEXT (1/Mm)

bCM

bSOIL

bEC

bOC

bNO3

bSO4

Figure D-9c. Comparison of observed (left) and 2002 Base G modeled (right) daily extinction for Big 

Bend (BIBE), Texas and Worst 20% (W20%) days in 2002. 

Bext Response (base18g - typ02g) at BIBE1 on Worst 20% Days

-7

-6

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

29 71 89 92 95 101 110 113 116 119 125 128 131 143 167 191 218 221 230 242 245 254 275 329 Avg

Julian Day

Delta Bext (1/Mm)

bCM

bSOIL

bEC

bOC

bNO3

bSO4

Figure D-9d. Differences in modeled 2002 and 2018 Base G CMAQ results (2018-2002) daily extinction 

for Big Bend (BIBE), Texas and Worst 20% (W20%) days in 2002. 
Uniform Rate of Reasonable Progress Glide Path

Guadalupe Mountains NP - 20% Data Days

17.19

16.49

14.74

12.99

11.23

9.48

7.73

6.68

16.35

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2020 2024 2028 2032 2036 2040 2044 2048 2052 2056 2060 2064

Year

Haziness Index (Deciviews)

Glide Path Natural Condition (Worst Days) Observation Method 1 Prediction

Figure D-10a. 2018 Visibility Projections and 2018 URP Glidepaths in deciview for Guadalupe 

Mountains (GUMO), Texas and Worst 20% (W20%) days using 2002/2018 Base G CMAQ 36 km 

modeling results. 

Uniform Rate of Reasonable Progress Glide Path

Guadalupe Mountains NP - Best 20% Days

5.95 5.95 5.95 5.95 5.95 5.95 5.95 5.95

5.74

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2020 2024 2028 2032 2036 2040 2044 2048 2052 2056 2060 2064

Year

Haziness Index (Deciviews)

Glide Path Natural Condition (Best Days) Observation Method 1 Prediction

Figure D-10b. 2018 Visibility Projections and 2018 URP Glidepaths in deciview for Guadalupe 

Mountains (GUMO), Texas and Best 20% (B20%) days using 2002/2018 Base G CMAQ 36 km modeling 

results. 
Worst 20% Obs (left) vs Typ02g (right) at GUMO1

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

74 83 92 95 122 131 137 146 161 164 167 170 173 176 191 218 221 245 251 254 260 266 272 329 _ Avg

Julian Day in Worst 20% group

bEXT (1/Mm)

bCM

bSOIL

bEC

bOC

bNO3

bSO4

Figure D-10c. Comparison of observed (left) and 2002 Base G modeled (right) daily extinction for 

Guadalupe Mountains (GUMO), Texas and Worst 20% (W20%) days in 2002. 

Bext Response (base18g - typ02g) at GUMO1 on Worst 20% Days

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

74 83 92 95 122 131 137 146 161 164 167 170 173 176 191 218 221 245 251 254 260 266 272 329 Avg

Julian Day

Delta Bext (1/Mm)

bCM

bSOIL

bEC

bOC

bNO3

bSO4

Figure D-10d. Differences in modeled 2002 and 2018 Base G CMAQ results (2018-2002) daily 

extinction for Guadalupe Mountains (GUMO), Texas and Worst 20% (W20%) days in 2002.