Western Regional Air Partnership 

2007 Work Plan 

September 5, 2006
 1

Table of Contents

I. Introduction ........................................................................................................... 2 

II. Background .......................................................................................................... 6 

 

III. Project Summaries ............................................................................................... 9 

 Stationary Sources Joint Forum .......................................................................9 

 Fire Emissions Joint Forum ............................................................................ 10 

 Dust Emissions Joint Forum ................................................................ 11 

 Mobile Source Forum ................................................................................. 12 

 Air Quality Modeling Forum ........................................................................... 13 

 Emissions Forum ........................................................................................ 14 

 Ambient Monitoring and Reporting Forum .......................................................... 14 

 Attribution of Haze Work Group ...................................................................... 15 

 Air Managers Committee .............................................................................. 16 

 Communications Committee .......................................................................... 17 
 2

I. INTRODUCTION 

This work plan was developed by the WRAP Planning Team (Oversight Committees and Forum 

Co-Chairs) and summarizes ongoing activities and expenditures of the Western Regional Air 

Partnership (WRAP), including current projects and those planned for 2007 and 2008. This 

work is funded through existing EPA grants (FY04-05) and through the WRAP’s FY06 regional 

haze grant from EPA. 

The total amount of EPA’s FY06 funding for the WRAP’s regional haze work is $1,302,555. Of 

this amount, $787,095 will be awarded to WGA and $515,460 will be awarded to NTEC. This 

document will be submitted to EPA in support of WGA’s grant application. The NTEC work 

plan is a separate document that will be submitted to EPA by NTEC. 

As shown in Table 1, as of June 30, 2006, $3,130,920 remains in WGA’s existing WRAP grant 

(FY04-05). Table 2 lists projects currently underway and funded through the existing grant. 

Table 3 lists pending projects, including current and future tribal data projects covered under 

NTEC’s grant. Table 3 also identifies those projects to be funded with FY06 grant funds. 

For this work plan, NTEC and WGA staff worked together to present budgets for each 

organization that provide funding for staff, travel support, and project management through 

September 2007. The budgets reflect the fact that effective July 1, 2006 NTEC assumed 

administrative responsibility for contracts related to the work of the Tribal Data Work Group and 

for reimbursement of tribal travel and meeting expenses. 

In developing this work plan, the WRAP Planning Team recognized that the FY06 grant funds 

covered by this work plan will be the last funds NTEC and WGA receive prior to the SIP 

deadline of December 2007. Also, the WRAP’s FY07 grant (funds available in late 2007) may 

be reduced from historical funding levels. Therefore, all critical projects and contract work 

needed for the SIPs must be funded through this work plan. 

In developing this work plan, WRAP forums and committees were asked to consider projects 

that are essential to the needs of state and tribal implementation plans for regional haze, 

including the key technical support elements that must be maintained through 2008 (after the 

SIPs are submitted). 

It is important to note that the WRAP’s planning process must accommodate a unique landscape 

of environmental, social, economic, and political issues. The WRAP region includes 116 (or 

75 percent) of the nation’s 156 mandatory federal Class I areas, half the land mass of the United 

States (not including Alaska), a very large portion of publicly-owned lands, and numerous tribal 

jurisdictions (many with large land areas). It also emits a minority of total U.S. emissions, 

borders both Canada and Mexico, and receives pollution from Asia. Air quality in Western 

Class I area is also greatly influenced by “natural” emissions, such as those from wildfires and 

wind-blown dust. 

The WRAP region is also experiencing rapid population growth and other challenges to 

preventing deterioration of air quality, such as drought. This presents a unique and challenging 
 3

environment for long-term planning which is best addressed through a single, well-funded and 

well-organized institution at the appropriate political level. The WRAP, with appropriate 

financial support from EPA, provides such an institution, especially given its management 

structure shared between the Western Governors’ Association and the National Tribal 

Environmental Council. 

Finally, the WRAP’s long-term planning process must deal with relevant events beyond its 

control, such as federal initiatives and the ramifications of legal challenges to the RHR. One 

way the WRAP contends with these events is to have sufficient staffing to track the issues and to 

foster a constructive dialogue among its members. 

Table 1 - June 30, 2006 

Financial Status Report 

 

WGA 

FY04-05 

Funds 

Remaining

2006 

Grant 

Funds - 

WGA 

Total 

Budget – 

WGA 

Travel Reimbursements 34,832 225,532 260,363 

Conference Calls 26,129 4,059 30,187 

Meeting Expenses 9,268 76,951 86,218 

Direct Salaries and Benefits 201,479 166,075 367,554 

Overhead & Other Expenses 151,288 49,479 200,767 

Travel and Project Management through 9/07 422,995 522,095 945,090 

Contractor Assistance ($1,077,000 obligated) 2,707,925 265,000 2,972,925 

Total 3,130,920 787,095 3,918,015 

 
 4

Table 2: Projects Underway 

Project Title Current Expenditures 

 Contract to Date 

SSJF 

Review 2018 Projections for Non-Utility Sources in 309 SO2 Program (Pechan) 23,300 5,963

Oil and Gas EI Improvements & Control Strategy Evaluation 100,000 0

FIRE 

2002 National Wildfire EI (inter-RPO project - Air Sciences) 133,779 120,252

Phase III & IV Inventories plus Additional Tasks (Air Sciences) 188,936 151,128

Evaluation of FTS (AS/ECR) 24,130 21,712

MOBILE SOURCES 

Non-Road Retrofit Demonstration Projects - (Emissions Advantage) 244,540 223,384

MODELING 

Regional Modeling Center (UCR) 3,567,421 3,311,100

EMISSIONS 

EDMS (Pechan) 933,788 877,971

TRIBAL DATA 

Tribal Inventory Gathering and Analysis (ITEP/NAU) - Phase III 442,000 352,439

DUST 

Common Definition of Dust and Dust Emission Types (Environ) 86,953 69,316

Fine Fraction of Dust EFs (MRI) 130,436 124,278

Update Handbook (Countess) 30,000 18,931

Pilot Project -NM (106) 60,000 15,000

AMBIENT MONITORING AND REPORTING 

Causes of Haze ($70 K for Dust Impacts, $85 K for Tribal Areas) (DRI) 1,020,000 916,600

Natural Haze Levels Analysis (from OAQPS, national project) (Tombach) 85,000 76,210

ATTRIBUTION OF HAZE 

TSS Phase I & II (ARS) 250,948 181,652

TSS (CIRA) 71,000 0

AIR MANAGERS COMMITTEE 

308 Implementation Work Group - State Support (WESTAR) 36,000 31,775

308 Implementation Work Group - Tribal Support (NM) (109) 60,000 40,000

State Caucus Staff Support (WESTAR) 587,434 501,190

309 2004 Milestone Report (Perrin Quarles) 30,762 13,924

COMMUNICATIONS 

Web Site Maintenance (B. Bissey) 151,500 128,086

Subtotal for Projects Underway 8,257,927 7,180,911
 5

Table 3: Pending Projects 

FY05 Grant FY06 Grant 

 2006-07 2007 2008 

STATIONARY SOURCES 

BART - Technical Assistance to States and Tribes 89,000 

309 SO2 Program Revisions 90,000 

FIRE 

Fire Tracking System 204,000 50,000

Smoke Mgmt Technical and Policy Workshop 21,000 

Section 308 Strategies for Fire 60,000 

MODELING 

Modeling Support for 308 and 309 SIPs 150,000 100,000 

EMISSIONS 

2006-2007 EDMS Hosting / Operation 320,000 40,000

DUST 

Enhanced Data Analysis (Pilot Project or Other) 53,000 

AMBIENT MONITORING AND REPORTING 

Causes of Haze 50,000 50,000

ATTRIBUTION OF HAZE 

TSS -2007 375,000 

AIR MANAGERS COMMITTEE 

Contractor Assistance 50,909 

308 Implementation Work Group - State Support 18,000 

Technical and Economic Analysis of Reasonable Progress 50,000 

State Caucus Staff Support (to Sept. 07) 55,000 

COMMUNICATIONS COMMITTEE 

Public Outreach and Communication on WRAP Issues 20,000 

Web Site Maintenance 25,000 25,000

Subtotal for Pending Projects – WGA 1,630,909 100,000 165,000

 

FY05 Grant FY06 Grant 

TRIBAL DATA - NTEC Grant 2006-07 2007 2008 

Analysis of SIPs for Tribal Issues 100,000 

Tribal Data in Technical Support Document 50,000 

TEISS 50,000 72,500 50,000

Analysis of Improve Network 30,000 

Subtotal 200,000 102,500 50,000
 6

II. Background 

The 1990 Amendments to the Clean Air Act established the GCVTC, which in June of 1996 

completed its original mission to recommend strategies for improving visibility in the Grand 

Canyon and other Class I areas on the Colorado Plateau. Recognizing the need for a process to 

monitor and coordinate the implementation of its final recommendations, the GCVTC members 

created the WRAP. The WRAP includes participants from industry, environmental groups, and 

other affected parties and operates in conjunction with regional organizations such as WESTAR, 

the Western Governors' Association, and the National Tribal Environmental Council. The work 

products of the WRAP are used by states and tribes in the preparation of their individual 

implementation plans to meet the requirements of the federal regional haze rule promulgated by 

the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 1999. 

While the initial focus of the WRAP was to implement the recommendations of the GCVTC in 

conjunction with federal visibility rules, the requirements of these rules also highlighted the need 

to implement other regional planning processes to improve visibility in all western Class I areas. 

In March 1999, the WRAP expanded its charter to address all regional air quality issues. 

A. Tribal Options for Implementation Plan Development 

Under the regulatory framework provided by the Tribal Authority Rule (TAR) (40 CFR 49.1– 

49.11) and the regional haze rule, tribal implementation of visibility programs through Tribal 

Implementation Plans (TIPs) is optional. The TAR authorizes but does not require tribes to 

receive delegation of authority to implement any program, or “reasonably severable elements” of 

a program, under the Clean Air Act. The preamble to the regional haze rule explains that “a 

tribal visibility program is not dependent on strategies selected by the State or States in which the 

tribe is located.” (64 Fed. Reg. 35714, 35756, July 1, 1999) The net result is that any tribe in the 

GCVTC transport region may implement §308 or §309 in whole or in part. 

The policy and technical work of the WRAP to assist states is designed to simultaneously assist 

tribes in the same way. Tribal concerns are being addressed at every level within the WRAP. 

Tribal and state implementation plan needs may be different. As these differences are identified, 

project tasks and work plans are updated to reflect the improved understanding of tribal needs. 

To ensure that tribal needs are addressed, the active participation of tribal representatives on all 

forums has been and will continue to be sought and encouraged. The National Tribal 

Environmental Council (NTEC) is responsible for coordinating tribal participation in the WRAP 

and receives funds from EPA for this purpose. Since some tribes do not have the resources or 

expertise to participate in the WRAP, NTEC provides tribes with analyses and synopses of issues 

emanating from the WRAP forums and work groups and from sources outside the WRAP. 

NTEC also facilitates consensus building within the WRAP tribal caucus. The Institute for 

Tribal Environmental Professionals (ITEP) at Northern Arizona University also provides 

assistance and staff through the Tribal Data Development Working Group to address a key tribal 

need – the acquisition of data necessary to make informed policy decisions. 
 7

Finally, it should be noted that the WRAP organizational structure provides several checkpoints 

for tribal input. First and foremost, the WRAP has established equal representation for tribes and 

states within its management structure, including a tribal Co-Chair of the WRAP. Key positions 

are also reserved for tribal representatives on all standing committees, forums, and work groups. 

Public workshops for WRAP work products and travel support from the WRAP ensure that the 

broader tribal community has an opportunity to participate in the WRAP process. 

B. WRAP Organization and Structure 

In September 1997 the WRAP was formed with a membership including states and tribes both 

within and outside the GCVTC region. The WRAP established oversight committees and 

forums charged with developing work plans to implement the GCVTC recommendations and to 

facilitate development of implementation plans under the RHR. 

1. Membership 

The WRAP membership currently includes the Governor or his/her designee from 14 states and 

12 tribes, two U.S. Cabinet Secretaries and the Administrator of the EPA or their designees: 

States Tribes 

Alaska Campo Band of Kumeyaay Indians 

Arizona Cortina Indian Rancheria 

California Hopi Tribe 

Colorado 

Hawaii 

Hualapai Nation of the Grand Canyon 

Shoshone-Bannock Tribes of Fort Hall 

Idaho Native Village of Shungnak 

Montana Nez Perce Tribe 

New Mexico Northern Cheyenne Tribe 

North Dakota Pueblo of Acoma 

Oregon Pueblo of San Felipe 

South Dakota 

Utah 

Washington 

Wyoming 

Confederated Tribes of Salish and Kootena 

Pueblo of Zuni 

Federal Agencies

Department of the Interior 

Department of Agriculture 

EPA 

 

2. Charter and Bylaws 

The WRAP Charter and Bylaws set forth the organizations goals, principles, and operating 

procedures and are posted on the WRAP website at http://www.wrapair.org/about/index.html. 
 8

3. WRAP Organization 

The WRAP is composed of several forums, committees, and work groups. All these groups 

include participation from the WRAP membership (states, tribes, and federal agencies) and 

interested stakeholders (industry, environmental groups, local governments, academia, etc.). 

Committee and forum members are expected to represent and communicate with their agencies 

and constituents. Forum and committee members are responsible for establishing mechanisms 

that will ensure this communication occurs. These mechanisms may involve working through 

trade groups, state and tribal organizations such as the Western States Air Resource Council 

(WESTAR Council), the National Tribal Environmental Council (NTEC), and intra- and interagency forums. 

C. Project Management 

Members of committees and forums perform much of the work of the WRAP. The oversight 

committees monitor forum and work group activities to ensure that work products are developed 

in a timely manner and that stakeholder participation remains representative, balanced, and fair. 

Contractors hired with EPA grant funds are relied upon to expand the resources of the WRAP. 

Committees and forums direct the work of contractors. 

Support services to the WRAP come from the National Tribal Environmental Council (NTEC) 

and the Western Governors’ Association (WGA). The Communications Committee has 

developed a Communications Manual for the WRAP’s internal and external communications and 

assists committees and forums with outreach strategies for specific products and activities. 

WGA and NTEC staff provide overall project management for the WRAP, including preparing 

and managing grant applications, funds, requests for proposals (RFPs), contracts, travel 

reimbursements, meetings, conference calls, public and media inquiries, press releases, Web 

sites, requests to participate in the WRAP, and report publications. Staff assistance includes 

providing a “sounding board” for stakeholders having concerns with the WRAP processes and 

relating concerns to forum co-chairs, oversight committees, committee co-chairs, facilitators, and 

the WRAP co-chairs. 

WGA and NTEC staff routinely attend the meetings of the various committees and forums. 

WGA and NTEC jointly or separately perform tasks related to WRAP and serve as primary 

contact points by responding to media and public inquiries. 

Under a separate EPA grant, NTEC assists tribal participation in the WRAP by arranging and 

facilitating Tribal Caucus meetings; providing coordination among tribal representatives of 

various committees and forums; performing legal, policy and technical analyses on various 

WRAP issues; and securing contractor assistance for additional policy and technical analysis. 

This includes providing staff support to the Tribal Caucus within the WRAP. 

Staff positions include the WRAP Co-Directors (WGA and NTEC) who oversee other staff, 

share general management responsibilities, work with stakeholders to ensure the WRAP's 

processes are fair an equitable, and serve as the primary points of contact for EPA, the media, 
 9

and the general public. There are state and tribal caucus coordinators hired with WRAP funds 

through WESTAR and NTEC, respectively. 

WGA also employs a technical coordinator and policy analyst to support the oversight 

committees, forums, and work groups. NTEC employs a tribal communications specialist who 

works closely with the WRAP's Communications Committee and who is available to other 

committees and forums to ensure that communications with and for the tribes are properly being 

carried out. NTEC also employs a tribal policy analyst to address the unique circumstances of 

tribes with respect to the Clean Air Act and other related issues. 

D. Contract Management 

WRAP staff at NTEC and WGA work with the forums to manage WRAP contracts. WGA and 

NTEC, as the recipients of EPA grants, are responsible for executing and administering contracts 

and ensuring that work products are completed. These responsibilities are met with input from 

forums and work groups. Forums and work groups may create balanced subgroups for purposes 

of contract management. 

It is the responsibility of the forums and work groups and their respective oversight committees 

to develop the scope of work for each contract. All contracts are to be developed in accordance 

with the work plans approved by the WRAP and submitted to EPA. Once the scope of work has 

been properly developed, it is transmitted to WGA or NTEC who are responsible for developing 

an RFP or sole source justification. All RFPs are sent to known contractors, posted on the 

WRAP Web site, and published in the Federal Business Opportunities publication as appropriate. 

Bidders are provided 30 days to respond. 

II. PROJECT SUMMARIES 

The focus of the SSJF is on developing a stationary source control program to help meet the 

reasonable progress and BART requirements of the Clean Air Act and Regional Haze Rule. This 

work plan assumes that Section 309 SIPs for SO2 will be resubmitted by five states (OR, UT, 

NM, AZ, & WY) and that all other stationary sources/pollutants will be addressed through 

source-by-source BART approaches. The SSJF will also evaluate potential emission reduction 

strategies for non-BART sources. 

The SSJF will conduct the analyses necessary to support the Section 309 market-based 

alternative, including identifying BART-eligible sources and demonstrating that any alternatives 

demonstrate greater reasonable progress that BART. The SSJF will also help coordinate any 

plant-by-plant BART analyses the states or tribes may choose to pursue. 

Other SSJF activities include tracking EPA’s BART rules and proposed guidelines. The SSJF 

will also work with the 309 Coordinating Committee to conduct any additional analyses that may 

be necessary to allow states and tribes to resubmit the SO2 milestone and backstop emissions 

trading program following the court’s decision in CEED v. EPA. 

Stationary Sources Joint Forum
 10

Finally, NOx and PM emissions must be addressed in such a way as to satisfy the SIP revision 

requirements under Section 309 of the Regional Haze Rule, as well as the Section 308 BART 

and reasonable progress requirements for all states. 

Work will include emissions inventory analysis, improvements, and future year projections; 

examination of control technology capabilities; maintenance of the list of BART-eligible sources 

in the WRAP region; and technical demonstrations that alternatives developed for BART provide 

for greater reasonable progress than BART. 

There are several uncertainties that must be factored into this work. As a result, there is a need 

to maintain flexibility in program design and to assess new information as it becomes available, 

including information from ongoing WRAP technical studies which will provide more 

information on the contribution of various sources to regional haze in the West. 

To the extent practical, and as requested by WRAP members, the forum will coordinate the 

implementation of BART and address trading program design issues, such as 2018 and interim 

milestones; geographic, new source, and tribal considerations; monitoring and reporting 

requirements; enforcement provisions; economic impact assessments; and a general method for 

allowance allocation. 

The FEJF projects identified fall into two main categories: 

1) The first grouping includes Planning projects to directly support the development of 

policy and technical tools for SIP/TIP development under §308. 

2) The second grouping includes Implementation projects to directly support the existing 

fire policies and programs applicable to the implementation needs for §309 and §308. 

PLANNING 

 Smoke Management Technical and Policy Workshop - Work on the Smoke Management 

Technical and Policy Workshop will be started in 2006. A three-day workshop will be 

held in late 2006/early 2007 to assess technical work to date, §309 policy and SIP 

implementation, and refinement of policy options under §308. This effort will build on 

the two FEJF workshops held in 2004 to ensure that the needed technical and policy tools 

are in place for SIP/TIP development under §308. 

Section 308 Strategies for Fire – This project will be started in 2006. As states and tribes 

further develop their strategies for addressing fire impacts and contribution to regional 

haze for their §308 plans, new policies and strategies may need to be developed, their 

effects on the emission inventories determined and their visibility effects assessed. This 

task will ensure that the needed technical and policy tools are in place for SIP/TIP 

development under §308. 

Fire Emissions Joint Forum
 11

IMPLEMENTATION 

 Fire Emissions Tracking System – The project to Evaluate Existing Fire Tracking 

Systems was started in 2005 and will be completed in Fall 2006. Evaluation of existing 

fire emissions inventory systems was a prudent step to develop a Fire Emissions Tracking 

System (FETS) as identified in the WRAP FTS Policy to calculate emissions from fire 

activity data. Based on the results of the evaluation project, the FEJF will proceed with 

the development of a WRAP FETS in 2006. Implementation of the WRAP FETS will 

continue into the future. The WRAP FETS will incorporate a specific format, parameters, 

defaults, structure and methods of emission calculation for required and optional FTS 

elements per the WRAP FTS Policy such as the tracking of ERTs and the calculation of 

emissions averted. The WRAP FETS will also incorporate certain SMP elements critical 

to the interjurisdictional exchange of information describing characteristics of planned 

burns per the Guidance for Coordinating Smoke Management Programs under 

development through in-kind support by the FEJF. These tasks directly support the 

implementation of the FTS, AEG, and ESMP requirements in §309 as well as similar 

implementation issues for §308. The FEJF plans to fund the FETS primarily from its 

2006 budget with FY05$, but also requests $50,000 for 2008 FETS operations from the 

FY06 WRAP grant. Those monies would cover operations of the FETS only for the first 

half of 2008, an additional $50,000 (currently unfunded) is needed to cover FETS 

operations for the second half of 2008. 

 

Project Title Funding 

2006 

(FY05 $)

2007 

(FY05 $) 

2008 

(FY06 $) 

Planning 

Smoke Management Technical and Policy Workshop 21,000 

Section 308 Strategies for Fire 30,000 30,000 

Implementation 

Fire Tracking System – Evaluation of Existing FTS 24,130 

Fire Emissions Tracking System – Development & 

Implementation 204,000 

50,000 

(50,000 for 2nd 1⁄2 of 

2008 unfunded) 

The Dust Emissions Joint Forum (DEJF) has made significant progress on several fronts, 

including: completion and evaluation of a regional windblown dust inventory, analysis of 

ambient dust data at Class I areas and its attribution to various sources, quality assurance of dust 

emissions data provided by jurisdictions across the WRAP region, experimentally-based 

improvements to PM2.5 emission factors for fugitive dust, completion and revisions to the WRAP 

Fugitive Dust Handbook, development and demonstration of a definition of natural and 

anthropogenic dust, and development of a template for the dust portion of a regional haze SIP 

using Salt Creek, NM as a test case. 

 

Dust Emissions Joint Forum
 12

Although much progress has been made in advancing the technical and policy tools available to 

address dust in Class I areas, there is still significant uncertainty regarding the sources of dust at 

many Class I areas on the 20% worst visibility days. The DEJF has identified a few areas where 

its remaining funds can be used to address this uncertainty. The work would build upon and 

enhance the current body of work described above. Some examples are provided below. The 

precise application of DEJF funds will depend on the final outcome of its current projects and on 

the interest expressed by DEJF members, particularly on the project described below regarding 

enhancement of local windblown dust emission factors. 

 

The remaining funds will be used to conduct additional analysis of the ambient dust data at Class 

I areas and/or to develop empirically-based windblown dust emission factors for a subset of 

Class I areas. The original analysis of ambient dust data was limited to 3 of the 5 years 

comprising the regional haze visibility baseline. Additional data are now available for the 5th 

year and could be added to the analysis. Alternatively, an enhanced analysis method using wind 

back trajectories, landuse data, and wind erodability indices has been demonstrated by the Desert 

Research Institute using data from the Salt Creek Class I area in New Mexico. This method 

could be applied to other high-dust areas to further identify the causes of dust. Finally, 

empirically-based windblown dust emission factors could be developed for one or two Class I 

areas using sand traps designed and built by the Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control 

District in eastern CA. The District has offered in-kind technical support and sand traps to other 

areas which may benefit from having more accurate emission factors. To the extent these areas 

are representative of other Class I areas, this approach may improve local windblown dust 

emissions for several Class I areas. The current factors are based on a limited set of wind tunnel 

studies and 4 km-resolution data regarding land use and soil types. Although they provide 

meaningful regional and qualitative emissions data, they do not significantly improve the 

performance of gridded air quality simulation models with respect to dust. 

Diesel retrofits are a growing national priority and increases are expected in federal funds to 

support specific retrofit proposals. Regional organizations can enhance the success of this broad 

initiative by providing cost-effective options for government and stakeholder outreach, training, 

sharing information and lessons learned, inter-project coordination, administrative and technical 

support, and effective communications between federal grantors and local project implementers. 

The value of regional organizations in a national retrofit intiative is recognized in the Clean Air 

Act Advisory Committee's April 10, 2006 recommendations to EPA, and is also evident in the 

number of regional diesel collaboratives recently formed. However, it is not clear that sufficient 

resources will be provided to capitalize on the advantages of these regional organizations. 

 

For the past two years the WRAP has used some of its funds to promote diesel retrofits through 

the oversight and leadership of the Mobile Sources Forum (MSF). MSF products have incluced 

written guidance on diesel retrofits, technology updates, summaries and updates of available 

funding sources, ad hoc support to WRAP members for individual projects and grant proposals, 

and a series of comprehensive diesel retrofit boot camps intended to spur the development and 

enhancement of diesel retrofit projects and programs. 

 

Mobile Sources Forum
 13

Due to increasing budget constraints on the WRAP, no new projects or funding are being 

proposed for the MSF. The MSF will continue its focus on diesel retrofits and convene on a 

regular basis to share information on diesel retrofit projects, trends, and opportunities. It will 

also advocate for sufficient regional funding and be prepared to make the best use of such 

funding in the event the WRAP acquires additional funds through restoration of its regional haze 

grant or through other means. 

The Modeling Forum will complete the work defined in the 2006 Regional Modeling Center 

(RMC) contract (http://pah.cert.ucr.edu/aqm/308/docs/2006/memo_RMC_2006_contract_mods.doc), 

and complete the associated documentation. While completing this work, the Modeling Forum 

proposes to then address the following strategic goals with their Regional Modeling Center 

project during 2007-08: 

1) Provide states and tribes continuing and expanded support for and access to RMC 

information for data mining and technology transfer; 

2) Provide stable storage media and support services for long-term archiving, data transfer, and 

ongoing website support as needed by the WRAP; 

3) Define and implement a revised, scaled-back form of the RMC to be implemented by the end 

of 2006; and 

4) Move to a “work assignment” format for 2007-08 regional modeling simulations in support 

of the haze SIPs: 

a. Plan for 3 or 4 control strategy and/or sensitivity regional modeling simulations to 

support haze SIP preparation during 2007; and 

b. An approximately equal number of regional simulations in 2008 to answer or clarify 

questions about the haze SIPs submitted in December 2007. 

The preferred approach will be to modify and scale back the existing RMC structure. Computer 

upgrades/purchases will need to be made because existing RMC equipment is getting old and 

unreliable. 

The Forum also proposes that a policy support approach to defining the scope, scale, and 

questions to be answered by each simulation be implemented; these decisions should be 

coordinated by an oversight group of key technical and planning/policy representatives across 

the WRAP region. This new or existing group might include and/or consolidate members from 

the TOC, the AoH Workgroup, the IWG, and draw upon the expertise of each individual Forum 

or Workgroup as needed. The AoH Workgroup is currently closest in composition to the group 

proposed by the Modeling Forum. The Modeling Forum specifically proposes that they not 

decide “what to model”, instead focusing on addressing the strategic goals listed above. 

Discussions with the TOC, AMC, IWG, and AoH Workgroup are planned over the next several 

months. 

Air Quality Modeling Forum
 14

Modeling Forum Budget Summary for 2006-08: 

FY05 Grant FY06 Grant Request Currently Unfunded

2006-2007 2007 to mid-2008 July-December 2008 

Modeling Support 

for 308 & 309 SIPs 

150,000 100,000 50,000 

The Emissions Forum intends to focus on maintenance and operation of the Emissions Database 

Management System (EDMS) for the foreseeable future, at this point, through 2008. The EDMS 

is operational, although some functions are currently being improved in response to deficiencies 

identified by third party testing. The system must be maintained to provide states and tribes the 

means to prepare regional haze plans, assess control strategies, conduct additional modeling 

analyses, house updates to existing inventories, address new inventory needs for pollutants of 

regional concern, and assess emission reduction efforts. 

The operation and maintenance budget includes the annual cost for a contracted database 

administrator to operate the EDMS, provide data analysis products, user assistance, quality 

assure new data, update database versions, resolve data overlaps between state and tribal data, 

and prepare standard reports. In addition, a host site is employed to provide the necessary 

hardware, including servers, and to ensure data security and archiving. 

Budget Summary for 2006-08: 

2006 (remainder) EDMS maintenance and operation, including host site $ 90,000 

2007 EDMS maintenance and operation, including host site $160,000 

2008 EDMS maintenance and operation, including host site $150,000

 Total $400,000 

Existing FY05 Emissions Forum EDMS funding $320,000 

New FY06 Funds requested to cover through mid-2008 $ 40,000 

Additional funding needed to cover through 12/08, but currently unfunded $ 40,000 

 Total $400,000 

 

The Causes of Haze Study is a complex, 4-year data analysis project totaling approximately 

$1,000,000. The study draws on the IMPROVE regional haze monitoring network data. This 

project will be complete at the end of 2006. The results are posted to the Causes of Haze 

Assessment web site at: http://coha.dri.edu/index.html. 

The data and results from this project need to be maintained and updated to a limited degree. As 

such, the AMRF proposes to use $50,000 of FY05 funds for CoHA website support and data 

update needs for 2007. The AMRF requests $50,000 from FY06 funds to cover limited support 

and maintenance for 2008. If the WRAP region states and tribes need to restore CoHA to a 

Ambient Monitoring and Reporting Forum

Emissions Forum
 15

higher level of effort than maintenance and limited updates, the existing data and results will be 

available, but additional funding will be required. 

 

AMRF Budget Summary for 2007-08: 

2007 (from FY05 funds) 2008 (from FY06 funds) 

Maintenance of the CoHA Website 50,000 50,000 

The AoH Workgroup has worked during 2005-06 to complete the delivery of the WRAP 

Technical Support System (TSS); the TSS will be released in October 2006 for use in regional 

haze planning by states and tribes in the WRAP region. The design, development, and 

implementation of the TSS has been directed by AoH Workgroup in close consultation with 

other Forums, Workgroups, the Technical Oversight Committee, and in particular, the 

Implementation Workgroup. AoH plans to operate the TSS using the same contractor team on 

an ongoing basis, to fully support the development and implementation of the December 2007 

haze plans. AoH uses a pair of parallel contracts to fund the contractor team as shown in the two 

tasks below. The full work plan for the late 2006 through 2007 time period can be found at: 

http://wrapair.org/forums/aoh/meetings/060726den/Workplan_2007_072706.doc. 

Major strategic goals of the work plan include: 

• Ongoing TSS web site hardware and software maintenance; 

• Database and analysis tool archiving for future reference and access by WRAP participants, 

stakeholders, and the EPA; 

• Formal training and general web site support for WRAP participants; 

• Analytical tool enhancements for access to monitoring, modeling, and emissions data as 

required by WRAP participants; and 

• Performance of additional regional or local analyses required for SIP preparation, as 

requested by WRAP participants. 

All work performed for this effort will be coordinated and prioritized by the AoH Workgroup. 

The training and analytical tasks will be performed in close consultation with the Implementation 

Work Group (IWG) and other Forums and Workgroups as appropriate. 

AoH Budget Summary for 2007-08: 2007 through mid-08 

(from FY05 funds)

July to December 2008 

(not currently funded) 

Operations, Maintenance, & 

TSS Development 

225,000 75,000 

User Support for Regional Haze Planning 

& Ongoing TSS Development 

150,000 50,000 

Existing FY05 AoH Workgroup TSS funding for 2007 through mid-2008 $375,000 

Additional funding needed to cover remainder of 2008, but currently unfunded $125,000

 Total $500,000 

Attribution of Haze Workgroup (AoH)
 16

The Air Managers’ Committee provides project review and tracking from the perspective of state 

and tribal air managers with primary responsibility for the development and tracking of regional 

haze plans. The state and tribal caucus coordinators at WESTAR and NTEC will continue to 

assist the committee in 2007. In addition to the staff support discussed below, there are two 

additional line items in the AMC budget. They are: 

Contractor Assistance ($50,000): These funds are earmarked for project needs not anticipated in 

the current work plan. When a forum identifies a new project or supplemental funding for an 

existing project, they can apply to the AMC for use of these contractor assistance funds. 

Technical and Economic Analysis of Reasonable Progress ($50,000): As the deadline for 

regional haze plans approaches, the Air Managers anticipate additional analyses will be needed 

to evaluate the technical and economic factors that go into determining whether the plans 

demonstrate reasonable progress for each Class I area. This work is expected to begin in mid2007, once the majority of emission reduction strategies have been identified and modeled. It is 

also likely that some of this work will occur in 2008 in order to answer questions that arise from 

EPA and others once the SIPs have been submitted. 

The AMC’s Implementation Work Group (IWG) is comprised of state and tribal staff (SIP/TIP 

writers). This group began its work in earnest in 2004. The IWG will continue through 2007 to: 

• Help guide and assess project output from the other WRAP forums and workgroups; 

• Develop a roadmap or template/framework that states and tribes may use to construct 

their individual SIPs and TIPs; 

• Compile information on supplemental benefits of regional haze control strategies, and; 

• Facilitate the essential understandings between states and tribes to develop and 

implement their SIPs and TIPs. 

Staff Support for the State and Tribal Caucuses

 The State and Tribal Caucus Coordinators assist the tribal and state air directors with continual 

tracking and reporting of WRAP activities, issue identification and communication among the 

WRAP partners, recruitment of WRAP participants from states and tribes, and facilitation of 

issue resolution. The State Caucus Coordinator position is filled through a contract between 

WGA and WESTAR. The Tribal Caucus Coordinator is funded through the NTEC budget. 

 

Implementation Work Group (IWG)

The IWG got up and running in 2004, and will continue its work in two principle areas through 

2006. First, IWG is on track to develop one or more “templates,” or “roadmaps,” to assist states 

and tribes in writing their 308 and 309(g) plans. In addition the IWG will maintain ongoing 

communication with the other forums and oversight committees as needed, prompting timely 

information from states and tribes, and in turn providing feedback to the forums to ensure they 

are focused on the critical planning questions. WESTAR provides direct staff assistance under a 

services contract with WGA. The State of New Mexico provides additional part-time contract 

staff to address the specific planning needs of tribes. 

Air Managers Committee
 17

 

Web Site Maintenance 

The WRAP’s website is one of its primary communications tools. The budgeted funds will be 

used to continue the contract with the WRAP’s webmaster through 2008. 

Public Outreach and Communication on WRAP Issues

These funds will be used to produce written materials, visual presentations, and other outreach 

material that describe the work of the WRAP to external audiences. This effort will begin in 

mid-2007 and continue into 2008 as the SIPs are finalized and need to be communicated to 

governmental entities and the public at large. 

Communications Committee