# Technical Analysis for Arizona Regional Haze FIPs :

Modeling Protocol for Subject

- to

- BART and BART

Control Options Analyses

Work Assignment: 5

- 12

Contract No: EP

- D

- 07

- 102

Task No : 5

Version: 3

Prepared for: Thomas Webb

Air Planning Office

U.S. EPA Region 9

75 Hawthorne Street

San Francisco, CA 94105

Prepared by: Uma Shankar , Liz Adams, Mohammad Omary,

Brian Naess

, and Sarav Arunachalam

Institute for the Environment

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Date delivered : July 16 , 20 1 2EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v3 July 16, 2012 

### ii ( This page intentionally left b la nk.)EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v3 July 16, 2012 

### iii 

# Contents

Document Change Record

................................ ................................ ................................ .......... iv

1 Introduction

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... 1

2 Model Versions

................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 1

3 CALPUFF Modeli ng

................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 1

3.1 Meteorological Data

................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 2

3.2 Ozone Data

................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 2

3.3 Ammonia Inputs

................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 2

3.4 Modeled and Emitted Species

................................ ................................ ............................. 5

3.5 Discrete Receptor Data

................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 5

4 CALPOST Inputs

................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 5

4.1 Postprocessing of CALPUFF Output

................................ ................................ .................. 5

4.2 Natural Visibility Conditions

................................ ................................ .............................. 6

4.2.1 IMPROVE Method 6

................................ ................................ ................................ . 6

4.2.2 IMPROVE Method 8

................................ ................................ ................................ . 9

References

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 11

Appendix A: BART Subje ct Model Protocol

................................ ................................ ......... A

- 1

Appendix B: EPA R

- 9 Guidance on BART Sources and Emissions for Modeling

.............. B

- 1

Appendix C: Natural Background Conditions for IMPROVE Method 6 (received

from EPA Region 9)

................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 1

Appendix D: Natural Background Conditions for IMPROVE Method 8 (taken

from FLAG

- 2010)

................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 1EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v3 July 16, 2012 

### iv 

# Document Change Record

Revision Date Remarks

0.1 March 14, 2012 First (draft) version submitted to EPA

2 .0 June 29, 2012 Ver. 2 submitted to EPA

- corrected Appendix B,

added this table

3.0 July 16, 2012 Ver. 3 submitted to EPA

– incorporates EPA

revisionsEMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v3 July 16, 2012 

### 1 

# 1 Introduction

The technical support tasks in Work Assignment (WA) 5

- 12 under EPA Contract Number EP

- D

07

- 102 are aimed in part at assisting the EPA Region 9 (Pacific Southwest) Air Division in

developing Federal Implementation Plans (FIPs) to establish air quality programs for Arizona

pursuant to Clean Air Act (CAA) Section 169A and Regional Haze Rule (RHR) Section 40CFR

51.308.

The technical analysis for Arizona’s Regional Haze FIP is focused on performing a Best Avail

able Retrofit Technology (BART) analys is and a reasonable progress analysis for potential

sources

.

T he CALMET

- CALPUFF

- CALPOST modeling system will be used to assess the visibility

impact of the dispersed pollutant plumes. The purpose of this protocol is to describe the types

and sources of d ata to be used in the modeling for this WA , with particular emphasis on the

source s of emissions data used and the justification for choosing those data sources

. In preparing

this protocol, extensive use has been made of the modeling protocol provided in A ppendix A

, which was followed in previous analyses performed for the Western Regional Partnership

(WRAP) of BART

- eligible sources in Arizona. Exceptions to procedures and recommendations

made in that protocol are noted as required throughout the main body of this document. Further,

this protocol reflects our initial approach to modeling, which could be subject to revision as

regards additional emission scenarios needed, based upon the findings of the initial analyses.



# 2 Model Versions

The WA requires the use of the following EPA

- approved versions of the modeling components:

(a) CALMET version 5.8, level 070623

(b) CALPUFF version 5.8, level 070623

(c) CALPOST version 6.221

To employ the more recent options to calculate visibility (IMPROVE Method 8) specified in the

WA, the CALPOST version used is later than that of the dispersion model. Also note that a t the

start of this project the specified CALPOST version was not available for download as it had

been superseded by a later version, 6.292. However, v6.292 encapsulates and is compatible with

the features of v6.221, and is the version being used in this WA.



# 3 CAL PUFF Model ing

All input settings for the CALPUFF modeling follow the values given in the WRAP Protocol for

BART Exemption Screening (WRAP, 2006) as required by the WA with the exceptions per EPA

guidance noted in this section . The se default input settings are provided in Table 3

- 3 of WRAP

(2006)

.EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v3 July 16, 2012 

### 2 

## 3.1 Meteorological Data

CALMET is the meteorologica l model used to provide meteorological inputs for the CALPUFF

modeling. This WA uses readily available CALMET output provided by the EPA from a

previous modeling effort by ENSR Corporation, the contractor responsible for BART analysis of

the Salt River Pro

ject (SRP)

— Navajo Generating Station (NGS) Units 1

- 3 near Page , AZ

( ENSR , 2009). Th us th e analyses to be performed using this protocol are for the same modeling

period ( 2001

- 2003 ) and modeling domain that was used in this previous CALPUFF analysis. The

modeling domain is shown as the area within the blue boundary in Figure 1 (ENSR, 2009) ; the

WRAP Arizona BART modeling domain is indicated as the area within the red boundary. For

reference, the major Class I Areas in Arizona and the six BART sources that are being modeled

in this WA are also shown in Figure 2

.

T he meteorological data for each year of CALPUFF modeling are input hourly, with one input

file per month modeled , i .e., the value of NMETDAT is non

- zero . The option s to be selected fo r

CALPUFF v5.8 are as follows:

METRUN = 0

IRLG = 24 * NDAYS, where NDAYS is the total number of days of meteorological data

input

The e nd d ate and time for the run should be specified in similar format to the beginning date and

time.

N.B.: METRUN = 1 will not work in this code version for multiple meteorological input files ;

the beginning date and time, end date and time, and number of hours of meteorological data

input must be specified

.



## 3.2 Ozone D

ata

Background ozone levels in parts per billion ( ppb ) are input to CALPUFF as annual files , and

have been provided as part of the data downloaded from previous modeling for NGS.



## 3.3 Ammonia Inputs

Ammonia will be held at a background value of 1 ppb for all months of the model run per EPA

guidance

.EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v3 July 16, 2012 

### 3 Figure 1. BART modeling domains for this WA (blue boundary) and WRAP BART Subject

modeling for AZ (red boundary). Taken from ENSR (2009).EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v3 July 16, 2012 

### 4 Figure 2. Map showing Arizona C IAs in relation to Apache, Cholla, and Coronado ; other CIAs

outside Arizona within the 300

- km rad ius of these sources are Bandelier Wilderness,

NM ; Bryce Canyon, UT ; Capitol Reef N ational P ark , UT ; Gila Wilderness, NM ;

Joshua Tree Wilderness, CA ; Mesa Verde National Park, CO ; San Pedro Parks

Wilderness, NM, and Zion National Park, UT

.EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v3 July 16, 2012 

### 5 

## 3.4 Modeled and Emitted Species

The choice of modeled and emitted species used for the BART analysis will follow the guidance

of the WRAP BART modeling protocol ( given in Appendix A) . Emissions are input for the

following species: SO 2 

### , NO

x 

### , and particulate matter (PM) ; PM is speciated into ammonium

sulfate, ammonium nitrate, elemental carbon, organic mass, soil

, and coarse mass if the types of

data available allow that speciation

. The National Park Service (NPS) provides PM speciation

profiles in spreadsheets and chart s on the following website for speciation of PM emitted by

several types of combustion units: http://www.nature.nps.gov/air/Permits/ect/index.cfm . If the

unit being modeled is not identifiab le in these spreadsheets

, a minimum speciation of PM

emissions from the facilities into fine and coarse PM (labeled PMF and PMC) will be attempted

using the AP

- 42 emission factor data for the type of boiler used in the source modeled. The

guidance on all t he emission inputs to be used for the sources modeled in the WA tasks covered

by this protocol (Tasks 6, 7

, and 8) is provided by EPA in the document given in Appendix B.



## 3.5 Discrete Receptor Data

NPS has compiled inputs for CALPUFF modeling of receptors dis cretized on a 4

- km grid for

each Class I Area and provided the data on their website

, along with the software for down

loading the data converted from the native lat itude

- long itude coordinate system to the Lambert

Conformal Conic grid in which the dispersi on modeling tasks for this WA will be performed.

The discrete receptor data and conversion program are downloadable from www.nature.nps.gov/

air/maps/receptors/index.cfm

.



# 4 CALPOST Inputs

I nputs to the CALPOST postprocessor are set according to the guidance of the WRAP BART

protocol, Section 3.1.3. The following sections provide specifics of how CALPUFF output will

be processed to calculate the visibility impacts of the selected BART

- eligibl e sources at the

relevant CIAs for this WA. They include details on the calculation of the natural background

concentrations of speciated PM for two different definitions of natural conditions, and two

visibility calculation methods.



## 4.1 Postprocessing of CA LPUFF Output

Visibility analysis is required for select ing 98 th



### - p ercentile visibility days, indicated by the 8 th



### - highest deciview from the annual runs of CALPUFF, as well as the 22 nd



### - highest deciview from

all three years of model output. CALPOST will be us ed to calculate the first metric by post

processing CALPUFF concentration output for each year individually from 2001 through 2003.

For calculating the second metric, there is no automation available for concatenating the three

annual ozone files to be use d as input to CALPUFF, so a continuous run from 2001 through 2003

is not possible. T herefore, t o select the 22 nd



### - highest deciview day using all three year s ’ worth of

output, first the yearly concentration files from CALPUFF should be concatenated usin g the

APPEND tool distributed with the CALPUFF model , and then CALPOST should be used to

postprocess the concatenated file to select the 22 nd



### - highest deciview day.EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v3 July 16, 2012 

### 6 

## 4.2 Natural Visibility Conditions

CALPOST v6.221 includes several methods of calculating natural back ground visibility . This

WA requires use of the IMPROVE Method 6, which considers the visibility impacts of PM

species aggregated over the whole particle size range, and the IMPROVE Method 8 (submode

5 ), which considers the different visibility impacts of s mall and large particles

, in order to

compare the results

. The input requirements for the two methods are different, and detailed in the

following sections

.

4.2.1 IMPROVE Method 6

Using Method 6, there are three ways to calculate the natural background visibili ty based on

(a) annual average natural conditions, (b) 20% best visibility days

, and (c) 20% worst visibility

days. The WRAP BART analysis for the Western region used all three methods according to the

WRAP BART protocol . However, the requirements of the WA call for only the first two

methods , which are described in the following subsections

.

4.2.1.1 Annual Average Background Concentrations



### To calculate the annual average background extinction

, the annual average concentrations for

SO 4 

### , NO 3 

### , EC, OC, Soil (labeled PMF in CALPOST)

, and Coarse Mass (labeled PMC in

CALPOST) are derived using two types of information from tables given in Guidance for

Estimating Natural Visibility Conditions under the Regional Haze Rule (EPA, 2003): the dry

constitu ent concentra tions for the average Western aerosol provided in Table 2

- 1 of this

document (“Average Natural Levels of Aerosol Components”) ; and the monthly f(RH) tabulated

for each CIA

, provided in Table A

- 3 , averaged over the year . The annual average f(RH ) for each

CIA is input into the IMPROVE equation along with the dry constituent concentrations:

β

ext 

### = 3 × f(RH) × [Ammonium Sulfate] + 3 × f(RH) × [Ammonium Nitrate]

+ 0.6 × [Coarse Mass] + 4 × [Organic Carbon] + 1 × [Soil] (1)

+ 10 × [Elemental Carbon] + β

ray



### where

β

ext 

### = extinction coefficient (Mm

- 1 

### )

multiplier preceding f(RH) = extinction efficiency for species named within the brackets

f(RH) = relative humidity adjustment (annual average ; unitless)

β

ray 

### = Rayleigh extinction coefficient (= 10 Mm

- 1 

### )

[ species ] = average dry constituent concentration of species named with in the brackets for a

Western aerosol , from EPA (2003), Table 2

- 1

.

4.2.1.2 Background Concentrations for 20% Best Visibility Days



### To derive the background concentrations of the individual components of PM from the

extinction coefficien t

, we would follow the procedure described in the d raft CALPUFF BART

m odeling p rotocol for Montana (MDEQ, 2006; available at

http://www.epa.gov/region8/air/pdf/MontanaBARTProtocol0906.pdf )

. Values for extinctionEMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v3 July 16, 2012 

### 7 (Mm

- 1 

### ) for the 20% best visibility days for each CIA are available in Appendix B of EPA ( 2003 )

, following the prescription of Ames and Malm ( 2002 )

. This approach estimates the 10 th



### - percentile

h aze i ndex (HI) in deciviews (dv) , corresponding to the mean of the 20% best visibility values

(denoted HI b20% 

### )

, from the annual average haze index, HI

ann

- av 

### , as follows:

HI b 20% 

### = HI

ann

- av 

### – 1.28 × sd (2)

where sd, the standard deviation of the HI distribution, has a recommended value of 2 dv for the

West

. From the value of HI b 20% 

### derived using Equation ( 2 ) , the corresponding extinction

coefficient for the 20% best visibility days

, β

ext

- b 20 % 

### , can be calculated as

β

ext

- b 20 % 

### = 10 exp (HI b 20% 

### /10) (3)

The Montana BART modeling protocol modifies the IMPROVE E quation (1) (Section 4.2.1.1)

for the 20% best visibility days extinction coefficient by introduc ing a scaling factor

, X

, for all

the PM constitue nts :

β

ext

- b 20 % 

### = 3 × f(RH) × [Ammonium Sulfate] × X

+ 3 × f(RH ) × [Ammonium Nitrate] × X ( 4 )

+ 0.6 × [Coarse Mass] × X + 4 × [Organic Carbon] × X

+ 1 × [Soil] × X + 10 × [Elemental Carbon] × X + β

ray



### To derive X

, β

ext

- b 20 % 

### can be obtained using Equation s 2 and 3 , or it can be calculated from the

HI b20% 

### values tabulated in Appendix B of EPA (2003) for each CIA . T he value for X can then be

determined from Equation 4 and applied to each of the PM constituent annual average back

ground concentrations at each CIA to obtain the corresponding background concen tration s on the

20% best visibility days. The average Western aerosol constituent background concentrations

needed to estimate the reference extinction (Mm

- 1 

### ) are provided in Table 1 below for the CIAs of

interest for the Arizona sources being modeled in this WA, along with the extinction efficiency

by constituent taken from EPA (2003). For each Arizona CIA affected by the BART

- eligible

sources in Arizona

, Table 2 gives its annual f(RH) and its extinction coefficients for reference

conditions and for 20% best visibility conditions as calculated using Equations 2 and 3 above

. Table 3 shows t he background PM concentration s calculated using the Table 2 values of β

ext

- b 20%



### for the same CIAs. A co mplete list of the 156 CIAs in North America along with their

background extinctions and concentrations for the 20% best visibility days calculated using the

above method is provided in Appendix C of this protocol for reference

.EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v3 July 16, 2012 

### 8 Table 1. Average Western aerosol constituent background concentrations

and extinction efficiencies

(NH 4 

### ) 2 

### SO 4 

### NH 4 

### NO 3 

### OC LAC Soil CM

Conc entration (  g/m 3 

### ) 0.12 0.10 0.47 0.02 0.50 3.00

Ext inction E ff

iciency (m 2 

### /g) a 

### 3.00 3.00 4.00 10.00 1.00 0.60

a Taken from EPA (2003)



### Table 2. Annual f(RH), and extinction coefficients for annual

average (reference) background conditions and 20 % best visibility

background conditions

, at the 20 C IA s of interest

Class I Area Annual

f(RH) β ext

- Ref



### (Mm - 1 

### ) β ext

- b 20 %



### (Mm - 1 

### )

Bandelier 1. 9 15. 62 12. 09 0

Bryce Canyon 1.8 15. 5 8 12. 0 54

Capitol Reef 1.9 15.63 12. 10 6

Chiricahua NM 1. 7 15. 4 7 11. 9 68

Chiricahua Wilderness 1. 7 15. 45 11. 96 3

Galiuro 1.6 15. 4 0 11. 9 45

Gila 1. 8 15. 5 1 12. 0 09

Grand Canyon 1. 8 15. 51 12. 0 35

Joshua Tree 2.1 15. 7 2 12. 1 66

Mazatzal 1.6 15.44 11. 9 75

Mesa Verde 1.9 15. 7 3 12. 176

Mount Baldy 1.7 15. 5 1 12. 0 15

Petrified Forest 1. 8 15. 5 4 12. 0 28

Pine Mountain 1. 7 15. 4 7 11. 97 6

Saguaro 1. 5 15. 35 11. 8 74

San Pedro Parks 1.9 15. 63 12. 106

Sierra Ancha 1.6 15. 4 6 11. 9 81

Superstition 1.6 15. 4 0 11. 9 37

Sycamore Canyon 2.1 15. 5 3 12. 0 54

Zion 1. 8 15. 5 6 12. 0 45EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v3 July 16, 2012 

### 9 Table 3

. Site

- specific background concentrations of PM constituents

for 20% b est v isibility d ays

Class I Area (NH 4 

### ) 2 

### SO 4



### ( μ g/m 3 

### ) NH 4 

### NO 3



### ( μ g/m 3 

### ) OC

( μ g/m 3 

### ) EC

( μ g/m 3 

### ) Soil

( μ g/m 3 

### ) CM

( μ g/m 3 

### )

Bandelier 0.045 0.037 0.175 0.007 0.186 1.117

Bryce Canyon 0.044 0.037 0.173 0.007 0.184 1.106

Capitol Reef 0.045 0.037 0.176 0.007 0.187 1.121

Chiricahua NM 0.043 0.036 0.169 0.007 0.180 1.082

Chiricahua W 0.043 0.036 0.169 0.007 0.180 1.079

Galiuro 0.043 0.036 0.167 0.007 0.178 1.069

Gila 0.044 0.036 0.171 0.007 0.182 1.093

Grand Canyon 0.044 0.036 0.171 0.007 0.182 1.093

Joshua Tree 0.045 0.038 0.178 0.008 0.189 1.136

Mazatzal 0.043 0.036 0.169 0.007 0.180 1.081

Mesa Verde 0.046 0.038 0.179 0.008 0.190 1.140

Mount Baldy 0.044 0.036 0.171 0.007 0.182 1.093

Petrified Forest 0.044 0.037 0.172 0.007 0.183 1.100

Pine Mountain 0.043 0.036 0.169 0.007 0.180 1.082

Saguaro 0.042 0.035 0.165 0.007 0.175 1.052

San Pedro Parks 0. 04 5 0. 03 7 0. 1 76 0. 00 7 0. 1 87 1. 1 21

Sierra Ancha 0.043 0.036 0.170 0.007 0.181 1.084

Superstition 0.043 0.036 0.167 0.007 0.178 1.069

Sycamore Canyon 0.044 0.037 0.172 0.007 0.183 1.096

Zion 0.044 0.037 0.173 0.007 0.184 1.103

4.2.2 IMPROVE Method 8

Under IMPROVE Method 8 (submode 5), t he extinction coefficient

, β

ext 

### , is calculated as

follows:

β

ext 

### = 2.2 × f

S 

### (RH) × [Small Sulfate] + 4.8 × f L 

### (RH) × [Large Sulfate]

+ 2.4 × f

S 

### (RH) × [Small Nitrate] + 5.1 × f L 

### (RH) × [Large Nitrate]

+ 2.8 × [Small Organic Mass] + 6.1 × [Large Organic Mass]

+ 10 × [Elemental Carbon] + 1 × [Fine Soil] + 0.6 × [Coarse Mass]

+ 1.7 × f

SS 

### (RH) × [Sea Salt] + β Ray 

### ( s ite s pecific)

+ 0.33 × [NO 2 

### (ppb)] {or as: 0.1755 × [NO 2 

### (μg/m 3 

### )]}

where the subscripts S, L

, and SS represent small particles, large particles

, and sea salt

, respectively , and a site

- specific value of β Ray 

### replaces the constant value of 10 Mm

- 1 

### in Eq. 1

.

All inputs needed for calculating β

ext 

### for each CIA using the method above are provided in the

FLAG

- 2010 report (FLM, 2010) and are given in Appendix D of this protocol . Figure 5 of th at

report provides the relationship to be used between total background concentrations of sulfate,EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v3 July 16, 2012 

### 10 nitrate

, and organic mass and their corresponding concentrations in the small and large size

fractions to calculate the size

- specific inputs for these species in CALPOST. Total PM

constituent concen trations and Rayleigh scattering coefficients for the 20% best visibility days

and annual average natural conditions for each CIA are provided in FLM (2010) Tables 5 and 6

, respectively , while the monthly f(RH) adjustment factors for large

- and small

- mode sulfate,

nitrate

, and sea salt can be found in Tables 7 through 9 of th at report. These inputs are used in

CALPOST to cal culate the extinction coefficient

, β

ext



### .EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v3 July 16, 2012 

### 11 

# References

Ames, R., and W. Malm, 2002: Recommendations for Natural Condition Deciview Variability:

An Examination of IMPROVE Data Frequency Distributions, Proceedings of “Regional

Haze and Global Radiation Balance

- Aerosol Measurements and Models: Closure

Reconciliation and Evaluation,” October 2

- 5, 2002, Bend, O R

.

ENSR, 2009: Revised BART Analysis for the Navajo Generating Station Units 1

- 3 , ENSR

Corporation, Document No. 05830

- 012

- 300, January 2009, Salt River Project

– Navajo

Generating Station, Tempe, AZ.

EPA, 2003: Guidance for Estimating Natural Visibility Conditions under the Regional Haze

Rule , Report # EPA

- 454/B

- 03

- 005, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air

Quality Planning and Standar ds, Emissions, Monitoring and Analysis Division, Air Quality

Trends Analysis Group, Research Triangle Park, NC.

FLM (U.S. Forest Service, National Park Service, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) , 2010:

Federal Land Managers’ Air Quality Related Values Wo rking Group Phase I Report

– Revised (2010) , Natural Resources Report NPS/NRPC/NRR 2010/232, National Park

Service, Denver, C O

.

MDEQ ( Montana Department of Environmental Quality), 2006: Draft CALPUFF BART

Modeling Protocol For Federal Mandatory Class I Are as, Montana Department of

Environmental Quality, Air Resources Management Bureau, Helena, MT.EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v 3 July 16 , 2012 

# Appendix A :

BART Subject Model ProtocolEMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v 3 July 16 , 2012EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v 3 July 16 , 2012 

# Appendix B :

Direction from EPA R egion 9 on

Emissions Inputs for Apache, Cholla and CoronadoEMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v 3 July 16 , 2012 

# 1 BART Sources and Their Emissions Inputs

There are a total of 3 facilities that will be analyzed through CALPUFF visibility modeling as

part of the Tasks 8 WA as follows:

Task 8: Perform a full five

- factor BART analysis for NOx controls with emissions inputs as

follows:

(a) Apache Generating Station (AEPCO), Units 1

- 3 (control s evaluated for 2 & 3) : All units

will use ADEQ BART limits on emission factors for SO 2 

### and PM, multiplied by the maximum

daily

- average heat inputs (BTU/hr) from CAMD/CEMS (2008

- 2010) to calculate the respective

emission rates for these pollutants. Unit 1 (not eligible for BART) will use the ADEQ BART

limits also on NO

x 

### , multiplied by the ma ximum daily

- average heat input (BTU/hr) from

CAMD/CEMS (2008

- 2010) to calculate the NOx emission rate. PM Speciation for this unit

should use NPS spreadsheet data for “Gas

- Fired Combustion Turbine Example” (see

http://www.nature.nps.gov/air/Permits/ect/docs/gasCT/EdRevConsensusGasCTexample.xls ). For

Units 2 and 3, the NOx baseline values will be taken as the CAMD/CEMS (2008

- 2010)

maximum daily

- average NOx emiss ion rates. The stack parameters provided by the facility

(Table B

- 2) should be used in place of the WRAP stack parameters, due to erroneous WRAP

modeling inputs for exit velocity and exit temperature

. PM speciation should use the NPS

spreadsheet data for “ PC Dry Bottom FGD and ESP Example” (see

http://www.nature.nps.gov/air/Permits/ect/docs/coalBoiler/2006FinalDryBottomPC_FGD_ESPp

mSpec iationProfile.xls ). Heating value, and percent coal ash and sulfur content needed as inputs

to the spreadsheet are provided in Table B

- 1.

(b) Cholla Power Plant, Units 1

- 4 : Unit 1 is not BART

- eligible, and will use actual maximum

daily average emissions fr om CAMD/CEMS (2008

- 2010) for SO 2 

### and NO

x 

### for all runs. For PM,

this unit has a baghouse similar to the BART

- eligible units 2

- 4, and thus the ADEQ BART limit

of 0.015 lb/mmBTU should be used for the PM emission factor; this should be multiplied by the

maxim um daily

- average heat input (BTU/hr) from CAMD/CEMS (2008

- 2010) to calculate the

filterable PM emission rate. Speciation of PM emissions should be done using the NPS

spreadsheets for “ PC Dry Bottom FF and FGD Example” (see

http://www.nature.nps.gov/air/Permits/ect/docs/coalBoiler/2006FinalDryBottomPC_FGD_FFpm

SpeciationProfile.xls )

. For Units 2

- 4, the NO

x 

### baseline values will be the actu al CAMD/CEMS

(2008

- 2010) maximum daily

- average NO

x 

### emission rates ; SO 2 

### and PM emissions should be

based on ADEQ BART limits on emission factors multiplied by the maximum daily

- average

heat inputs (BTU/hr) from CAMD/CEMS (2008

- 2010)

. Speciation of PM for Units 2 and 3

should be as in Unit 1 , but for Unit 4 it should use NPS spreadsheet data for “PC Dry Bottom

Wet Scrubber Example” (see

http://www.nature.nps.gov/air/Permits/ect/docs/coalBoiler/2006FinalDryBottom PCScrubberPmS

peciationProfile.xls ). Heating value, and percent coal ash and sulfur content needed as inputs to

the spreadsheets are provided in Table B

- 1. Updated stack parameter s provided by the facility

(Table B

- 2) should be used.

(c) SRP Coronado Units 1 and 2 (controls evaluated for 1) : 2008 will be the highest emission

year for this plant. ENSR/AECOM, the contractor who previously performed the BART analysis

on this plant, al so had different stack parameters before and after NO

x 

### burner installation. TheEMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v 3 July 16 , 2012 

### parameters appropriate to the plant conditions in 2008 should be used. Unit 1 will use ADEQ

BART limits on emission factors for SO 2 

### and PM, multiplied by the maximum daily

- aver age

heat input (BTU/hr) from CAMD/CEMS (2008

- 2010) to calculate the respective emission rates

for these pollutants. For Unit 1, the NOx baseline va lue will be the CAMD/CEMS 2008

maximum daily

- average NOx emission rate. Unit 2 is also eligible for BART , but a Consent

Decree (CD) applies to it, thus the emissions will held at the following values: 0.08 lb/mmBTU

for SO 2 

### and NO

x 

### , and 0.03 lb/mmBTU for filterable PM , multiplied by the maximum daily

average heat input (BTU/hr) from CAMD/CEMS 2008 to calculate the respective emission rate s

. ENSR calculated PM speciation for this plant, and these data should be used to speciate the PM

emissions above.EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v 3 July 16 , 2012 

### Table B

- 1. Summary of BART Sources, Emissions and Related Parameters for CALPUFF Emission InputsEMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v 3 July 16 , 2012EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v 3 July 16 , 2012 

### Table B

- 2. Stack Parameters for all BART SourcesEMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v 3 July 16 , 2012 

# Appendix C : Natural Background Conditions for

IMPROVE Method 6 ( received from EPA Region 9)EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v 3 July 16 , 2012EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v 3 July 16 , 2012EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v 3 July 16 , 2012EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v 3 July 16 , 2012EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v 3 July 16 , 2012EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v 3 July 16 , 2012EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v 3 July 16 , 2012EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v 3 July 16 , 2012EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v 3 July 16 , 2012 

# Appendix D :

Natural Background Conditions

for IMPROVE Method 8 (taken from FLAG

- 2010)EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v 3 July 16 , 2012 Table 5. 20% Best Natural Conditions

– Concentrations and Rayleigh Scattering By Class I Area a

Class I Area (NH 4 ) 2 SO 4 μg/m3 NH 4 NO 3

μg/m3 OM

μg/m 3 EC

μg/m 3 Soil

μg/m 3 CM

μg/m 3 Sea

Salt

μg/m 3 Ray

leigh

Mm - 1 Type

Acadia NP 0.09 0.03 0.68 0.01 0.10 0.94 0.03 12 B20%

Agua Tibia Wilderness 0.03 0.04 0.26 0.01 0.26 1.20 0.04 11 B20%

Alpine Lakes Wilderness 0.04 0.03 0.15 0.01 0.05 0.30 0.02 11 B20%

Anaconda Pintler Wilderness 0.04 0.03 0.12 0.01 0.07 0.31 0.00 10 B20%

Ansel Adams Wilderness 0.02 0.01 0.12 0.01 0.07 0.44 0.01 9 B20%

Arches NP 0.07 0.06 0.23 0.01 0.14 0.89 0.01 9 B20%

Badlands NP 0.05 0.05 0.23 0.01 0.22 0.99 0.00 11 B20%

Bandelier NM 0.07 0.06 0.31 0.01 0.16 0.91 0.00 9 B20%

Bering Sea Wilderness

- - - - - - - - B20%

Big Bend NP 0.05 0.04 0.24 0.01 0.11 0.80 0.00 10 B20%

Black Canyon of the Gunnison

NP 0.06 0.04 0.24 0.01 0.13 0.88 0.00 9 B20%

Bob Marshall Wilderness 0.05 0.04 0.19 0.01 0.08 0.37 0.00 10 B20%

Bosque del Apache

Wilderness 0.08 0.06 0.30 0.01 0.15 0.97 0.02 10 B20%

Boundary Waters Canoe Area

Wilderness 0.11 0.02 0.50 0.01 0.13 0.86 0.01 11 B20%

Breton Wilderness 0.14 0.05 0.73 0.01 0.27 2.26 0.07 11 B20%

Bridger Wilderness 0.05 0.04 0.14 0.01 0.07 0.33 0.00 9 B20%

Brigantine Wilderness 0.12 0.04 0.86 0.01 0.24 1.73 0.04 12 B20%

Bryce Canyon NP 0.04 0.05 0.18 0.01 0.10 0.60 0.00 9 B20%

Cabinet Mountains Wilderness 0.05 0.05 0.13 0.01 0.09 0.42 0.01 10 B20%

Caney Creek Wilderness 0.07 0.06 0.68 0.01 0.14 1.51 0.02 11 B20%

Canyonlands NP 0.07 0.06 0.23 0.01 0.14 0.89 0.01 9 B20%

Cape Romain Wilderness 0.14 0.06 0.88 0.01 0.24 1.99 0.04 12 B20%

Capitol Reef NP 0.06 0.07 0.26 0.01 0.15 0.79 0.01 9 B20%

Caribou Wilderness 0.03 0.02 0.12 0.01 0.08 0.24 0.01 10 B20%

Carlsbad Caverns NP 0.06 0.05 0.26 0.01 0.12 0.82 0.00 9 B20%

Chassahowitzka Wilderness 0.14 0.08 1.02 0.01 0.28 2.46 0.02 11 B20%

Chiricahua NM 0.06 0.05 0.27 0.01 0.13 0.81 0.00 10 B20%

Chiricahua Wilderness 0.06 0.05 0.27 0.01 0.13 0.81 0.00 10 B20%

Cohutta Wilderness 0.09 0.08 0.69 0.01 0.15 1.06 0.01 11 B20%

Crater Lake NP 0.02 0.02 0.08 0.01 0.07 0.23 0.01 9 B20%

Craters of the Moon NM 0.06 0.05 0.19 0.01 0.12 0.69 0.01 10 B20%

Cucamonga Wilderness 0.03 0.03 0.15 0.01 0.14 0.67 0.01 9 B20%

Denali NP 0.04 0.02 0.08 0.01 0.05 0.31 0.01 11 B20%

Desolation Wilderness 0.04 0.03 0.15 0.01 0.09 0.51 0.01 9 B20%

Diamond Peak Wilderness 0.02 0.02 0.08 0.01 0.07 0.23 0.01 9 B20%

Dolly Sods Wilderness 0.10 0.05 0.80 0.01 0.17 0.96 0.01 10 B20%

Dome Land Wilderness 0.03 0.02 0.18 0.01 0.08 0.43 0.01 10 B20%

Eagle Cap Wilderness 0.05 0.02 0.17 0.01 0.10 0.50 0.01 10 B20%EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v 3 July 16 , 2012 Eagles Nest Wilderness 0.04 0.03 0.14 0.01 0.08 0.36 0.00 8 B20%

Emigrant Wilderness 0.03 0.02 0.10 0.00 0.08 0.50 0.01 10 B20%

Everglades NP 0.16 0.07 0.77 0.01 0.16 1.86 0.12 11 B20%

Fitzpatrick Wilderness 0.05 0.04 0.14 0.01 0.07 0.33 0.00 9 B20%

Flat Tops Wilderness 0.04 0.03 0.14 0.01 0.08 0.36 0.00 8 B20%

Galiuro Wilderness 0.06 0.05 0.27 0.01 0.13 0.81 0.00 10 B20%

Gates of the Mountains

Wilderness 0.04 0.04 0.13 0.01 0.07 0.49 0.00 9 B20%

Gearhart Mountain Wilderness 0.02 0.02 0.08 0.01 0.07 0.23 0.01 9 B20%

Gila Wilderness 0.06 0.04 0.22 0.01 0.09 0.45 0.00 9 B20%

Glacier NP 0.05 0.03 0.17 0.01 0.11 0.57 0.00 11 B20%

Glacier Peak Wilderness 0.02 0.03 0.09 0.00 0.04 0.28 0.01 11 B20%

Goat Rocks Wilderness 0.02 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.04 0.21 0.01 10 B20%

Grand Canyon NP 0.04 0.03 0.12 0.01 0.10 0.59 0.00 9 B20%

Grand Teton NP 0.06 0.05 0.17 0.01 0.08 0.33 0.00 9 B20%

Great Gulf Wilderness 0.09 0.04 0.56 0.01 0.10 1.05 0.02 11 B20%

Great Sand Dunes NP & Pres 0.06 0.05 0.29 0.01 0.15 0.90 0.00 9 B20%

Great Smoky Mountains NP 0.09 0.06 0.78 0.01 0.16 1.47 0.01 11 B20%

Guadalupe Mountains NP 0.06 0.05 0.26 0.01 0.12 0.82 0.00 9 B20%

Haleakala NP 0.05 0.04 0.24 0.01 0.11 1.59 0.13 10 B20%

Hawaii Volcanoes NP 0.03 0.04 0.27 0.01 0.06 0.64 0.11 10 B20%

Hells Canyon Wilderness 0.06 0.02 0.19 0.01 0.14 0.81 0.01 11 B20%

Hercules

- Glades Wilderness 0.09 0.06 0.78 0.01 0.16 1.86 0.02 11 B20%

Hoover Wilderness 0.03 0.02 0.08 0.01 0.06 0.55 0.00 9 B20%

Isle Royale NP 0.10 0.02 0.34 0.01 0.09 0.79 0.01 12 B20%

James River Face Wilderness 0.11 0.06 0.71 0.01 0.20 1.39 0.01 11 B20%

Jarbidge Wilderness 0.05 0.03 0.14 0.01 0.05 0.33 0.00 10 B20%

John Muir Wilderness 0.02 0.01 0.12 0.01 0.07 0.44 0.01 9 B20%

Joshua Tree NP 0.04 0.02 0.20 0.01 0.17 0.94 0.02 10 B20%

Joyce Kilmer

- Slickrock

Wilderness 0.09 0.06 0.78 0.01 0.16 1.47 0.01 11 B20%

Kaiser Wilderness 0.02 0.01 0.12 0.01 0.07 0.44 0.01 9 B20%

Kalmiopsis Wilderness 0.03 0.02 0.31 0.01 0.05 0.99 0.04 12 B20%

Kings Canyon 0.03 0.03 0.18 0.01 0.08 0.73 0.02 11 B20%

La Garita Wilderness 0.06 0.04 0.24 0.01 0.13 0.88 0.00 9 B20%

Lassen Volcanic NP 0.03 0.02 0.12 0.01 0.08 0.24 0.01 10 B20%

Lava Beds NM 0.03 0.03 0.14 0.01 0.06 0.46 0.00 10 B20%

Linville Gorge Wilderness 0.08 0.06 0.67 0.01 0.14 1.04 0.01 11 B20%

Lostwood Wilderness 0.06 0.04 0.23 0.01 0.22 1.05 0.01 11 B20%

Lye Brook Wilderness 0.05 0.03 0.36 0.01 0.09 0.63 0.01 11 B20%

Mammoth Cave NP 0.11 0.08 0.86 0.01 0.24 1.54 0.01 11 B20%

Marble Mountain Wilderness 0.03 0.02 0.12 0.01 0.06 0.36 0.01 10 B20%

Maroon Bells

- Snowmass

Wilderness 0.04 0.03 0.14 0.01 0.08 0.36 0.00 8 B20%EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v 3 July 16 , 2012 Mazatzal Wilderness 0.06 0.05 0.30 0.01 0.14 0.80 0.00 10 B20%

Medicine Lake Wilderness 0.06 0.05 0.24 0.01 0.20 1.13 0.00 11 B20%

Mesa Verde NP 0.06 0.05 0.24 0.01 0.17 0.67 0.00 9 B20%

Mingo Wilderness 0.12 0.04 0.88 0.01 0.21 1.49 0.01 12 B20%

Mission Mountains Wilderness 0.05 0.04 0.19 0.01 0.08 0.37 0.00 10 B20%

Mokelumne Wilderness 0.04 0.03 0.15 0.01 0.09 0.51 0.01 9 B20%

Moosehorn Wilderness 0.11 0.04 0.76 0.01 0.12 1.25 0.02 12 B20%

Mount Adams Wilderness 0.02 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.04 0.21 0.01 10 B20%

Mount Baldy Wilderness 0.05 0.04 0.19 0.01 0.11 0.53 0.00 9 B20%

Mount Hood Wilderness 0.02 0.02 0.06 0.00 0.05 0.15 0.01 10 B20%

Mount Jefferson Wilderness 0.02 0.02 0.08 0.00 0.03 0.31 0.01 11 B20%

Mount Rainier NP 0.03 0.02 0.18 0.01 0.06 0.83 0.02 11 B20%

Mount Washington Wilderness 0.02 0.02 0.08 0.00 0.03 0.31 0.01 11 B20%

Mount Zirkel Wilderness 0.06 0.04 0.16 0.01 0.09 0.60 0.00 8 B20%

Mountain Lakes Wilderness 0.02 0.02 0.08 0.01 0.07 0.23 0.01 9 B20%

North Absaroka Wilderness 0.05 0.04 0.16 0.00 0.11 0.82 0.00 9 B20%

North Cascades NP 0.02 0.03 0.09 0.00 0.04 0.28 0.01 11 B20%

Okefenokee Wilderness 0.13 0.07 0.92 0.01 0.22 1.69 0.03 11 B20%

Olympic NP 0.04 0.03 0.23 0.01 0.03 0.50 0.04 11 B20%

Otter Creek Wilderness 0.10 0.05 0.80 0.01 0.17 0.96 0.01 10 B20%

Pasayten Wilderness 0.04 0.03 0.07 0.00 0.07 0.24 0.01 10 B20%

Pecos Wilderness 0.04 0.03 0.16 0.01 0.08 0.67 0.00 8 B20%

Petrified Forest NP 0.06 0.06 0.28 0.01 0.15 0.75 0.00 9 B20%

Pine Mountain Wilderness 0.06 0.05 0.30 0.01 0.14 0.80 0.00 10 B20%

Pinnacles NM 0.06 0.04 0.31 0.01 0.16 1.50 0.06 11 B20%

Point Reyes NS 0.12 0.04 0.33 0.01 0.13 1.08 0.25 12 B20%

Presidential Range

- Dry River

Wilderness 0.09 0.04 0.56 0.01 0.10 1.05 0.02 11 B20%

Rawah Wilderness 0.06 0.04 0.16 0.01 0.09 0.60 0.00 8 B20%

Red Rock Lakes Wilderness 0.06 0.05 0.17 0.01 0.08 0.33 0.00 9 B20%

Redwood NP 0.05 0.03 0.28 0.01 0.06 1.02 0.10 11 B20%

Rocky Mountain NP 0.04 0.02 0.15 0.01 0.09 0.68 0.00 9 B20%

Roosevelt Campobello

International Park 0.11 0.04 0.76 0.01 0.12 1.25 0.02 12 B20%

Saguaro NP 0.07 0.05 0.32 0.01 0.22 1.15 0.03 10 B20%

Saint Marks Wilderness 0.14 0.06 0.81 0.01 0.24 2.17 0.04 11 B20%

Salt Creek Wilderness 0.05 0.06 0.31 0.01 0.17 1.00 0.02 10 B20%

San Gabriel Wilderness 0.03 0.03 0.15 0.01 0.14 0.67 0.01 9 B20%

San Gorgonio Wilderness 0.03 0.02 0.15 0.01 0.10 0.62 0.02 10 B20%

San Jacinto Wilderness 0.03 0.02 0.15 0.01 0.10 0.62 0.02 10 B20%

San Pedro Parks Wilderness 0.05 0.04 0.14 0.01 0.09 0.34 0.01 8 B20%

San Rafael Wilderness 0.03 0.04 0.22 0.01 0.11 0.79 0.02 10 B20%

Sawtooth Wilderness 0.05 0.04 0.23 0.01 0.10 0.37 0.00 10 B20%

Scapegoat Wilderness 0.05 0.04 0.19 0.01 0.08 0.37 0.00 10 B20%EMAQ LOE (EPA Contract EP

- D

- 07

- 102) WA 5

- 12 : Task 5 Modeling Protocol for AZ BART Analyses

UNC

- EMAQ (5

- 12)

- 008.v 3 July 16 , 2012 Selway

- Bitterroot Wilderness 0.04 0.03 0.12 0.01 0.07 0.31 0.00 10 B20%

Seney Wilderness 0.08 0.01 0.38 0.01 0.09 0.80 0.01 12 B20%

Sequoia NP 0.03 0.03 0.18 0.01 0.08 0.73 0.02 11 B20%

Shenandoah NP 0.08 0.07 0.56 0.01 0.14 1.20 0.01 10 B20%

Shining Rock Wilderness 0.05 0.05 0.51 0.01 0.13 0.56 0.01 10 B20%

Sierra Ancha Wilderness 0.06 0.05 0.33 0.02 0.14 0.73 0.01 10 B20%

Simeonof Wilderness 0.06 0.05 0.25 0.02 0.04 1.18 0.25 12 B20%

Sipsey Wilderness 0.11 0.10 0.81 0.01 0.25 1.66 0.01 11 B20%

South Warner Wilderness 0.03 0.03 0.14 0.01 0.06 0.46 0.00 10 B20%

Strawberry Mountain

Wilderness 0.05 0.02 0.17 0.01 0.10 0.50 0.01 10 B20%

Superstition Wilderness 0.07 0.05 0.31 0.01 0.16 0.84 0.00 10 B20%

Swanquarter Wilderness 0.12 0.06 0.65 0.01 0.23 2.38 0.05 12 B20%

Sycamore Canyon Wilderness 0.06 0.05 0.28 0.01 0.12 0.62 0.00 9 B20%

Teton Wilderness 0.06 0.05 0.17 0.01 0.08 0.33 0.00 9 B20%

Theodore Roosevelt NP 0.07 0.04 0.26 0.01 0.21 1.20 0.01 11 B20%

Thousand Lakes Wilderness 0.03 0.02 0.12 0.01 0.08 0.24 0.01 10 B20%

Three Sisters Wilderness 0.02 0.02 0.08 0.00 0.03 0.31 0.01 11 B20%

Tuxedni Wilderness 0.03 0.04 0.09 0.01 0.03 0.52 0.05 12 B20%

UL Bend Wilderness 0.05 0.03 0.18 0.01 0.15 0.93 0.01 11 B20%

Upper Buffalo Wilderness 0.08 0.06 0.68 0.01 0.16 1.33 0.01 11 B20%

Ventana Wilderness 0.06 0.04 0.31 0.01 0.16 1.50 0.06 11 B20%

Virgin Islands NP 0.18 0.07 0.21 0.01 0.12 1.53 0.26 11 B20%

Voyageurs NP 0.12 0.02 0.56 0.01 0.10 0.86 0.01 12 B20%

Washakie Wilderness 0.05 0.04 0.16 0.00 0.11 0.82 0.00 9 B20%

Weminuche Wilderness 0.06 0.04 0.24 0.01 0.13 0.88 0.00 9 B20%

West Elk Wilderness 0.04 0.03 0.14 0.01 0.08 0.36 0.00 8 B20%

Wheeler Peak Wilderness 0.04 0.03 0.16 0.01 0.08 0.67 0.00 8 B20%

White Mountain Wilderness 0.05 0.03 0.24 0.01 0.08 0.67 0.01 9 B20%

Wichita Mountains Wilderness 0.03 0.04 0.28 0.01 0.15 1.52 0.01 11 B20%

Wind Cave NP 0.05 0.04 0.20 0.01 0.19 1.05 0.00 10 B20%

Wolf Island Wilderness 0.13 0.07 0.92 0.01 0.22 1.69 0.03 11 B20%

Yellowstone NP 0.06 0.05 0.17 0.01 0.08 0.33 0.00 9 B20%

Yolla Bolly

- Middle Eel

Wilderness 0.03 0.02 0.12 0.01 0.06 0.36 0.01 10 B20%

Yosemite NP 0.03 0.02 0.10 0.00 0.08 0.50 0.01 10 B20%

Zion NP 0.05 0.06 0.28 0.01 0.10 0.60 0.01 10 B20%

a Taken from FLM (20 10 )